Refugee Resettlement Watch

Australia refugee deal murkier by the minute; poster story for refugee program gone wrong!

Posted by Ann Corcoran on August 4, 2017

I’ve lost track of how many posts I’ve written on a refugee swap deal that Obama (and Anne Richard) engineered in the closing months of the Obama administration that would bring over 1,000 rejected ‘refugees’ to your towns in the coming months. (See archive here)

These are mostly men illegal aliens who, with the help of people smugglers, tried to reach Australia by boat, but were intercepted and taken to detention facilities where they have protested, rioted, and occasionally set fire to their living facilities.

Australian leftwing NO Borders activists want the mostly Muslim men admitted to Australia. So why should we take them to America? NOT OUR PROBLEM! http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2017/02/19/1900-manus-asylum-seekers-in-massive-class-action-against-the-go_a_21717262/

This week, as it looks like their admission to the US is stalled, efforts were being made to move some of them to another facility until violence and protests erupted.

The detainees say they won’t be safe if moved. It is unclear to me (and apparently the NYT too) who exactly would attempt to harm them as they wait to see if they hit the jackpot with a airplane ticket to America.

From the New York Times:

Hundreds of refugees and migrants living in limbo on a remote Pacific island refused Tuesday to vacate the detention facility where they have been held for years, the latest protest of their treatment under Australia’s offshore detention program.

The protest was a response to cuts to water and electricity to parts of the facility on Manus Island, in Papua New Guinea, where 800 men were still being held since attempting to reach Australia by boat.

The Australian authorities want the refugees to move to a new site; the protesters say they are being aggressively relocated and denied protection.

[….]

East Lorengau Refugee Transit Center, the new facility on Manus Island, is intended to temporarily house refugees awaiting resettlement. Those who are not considered refugees will be returned to their home countries.

These are men being considered by the Trump State Department to be your new neighbors!

The police commander on Manus, David Yapu, told the New Zealand news outlet Radio NZ that minor confrontations between the protesters and police officers had occurred in recent days.

“There was tension. We decided to withdraw,” Mr. Yapu said, saying his officers pulled back from the compound where the protest happened. “But our men are still there just to assist, to move the refugees from the Foxtrot compound.”

[….]

Most of the men on Manus Island have been formally recognized as refugees, but Australia refuses to allow them to be resettled.

The Obama administration had agreed to resettle hundreds of the refugees from Manus and Nauru, but this year President Trump questioned that decision.

He later confirmed he would follow through on the commitment for the one-time resettlement agreement after “extreme vetting” of the refugees, but it is unclear when this will take place.

Trump v. Turnbull phone call transcript leaked.

Trump ‘got it’ in January when he called it a “dumb deal.” It is about saving Turnbull from his radical Leftwing human rights agitators.

Remember, as I told you here, the reason these mostly men from Muslim countries are not being admitted to the mainland of Australia (when we are told repeatedly that they are legit refugees) is that Australia has a policy of never admitting anyone who tried to break into the country by boat.

We get that, and it is a good deterrent, but why is your US city or town to be punished with their US taxpayer-supported placement? 

Does anyone really think these men, who have learned from the Leftwing how to protest, are going to quietly go to work for BIG MEAT OR BIG CHICKEN?

(BTW, did anyone tell those detainees that they would come to America and be expected to do this kind of manual labor?)

Now we have the snarky Washington Post suggesting that Trump didn’t ‘get it’ (doesn’t understand the refugee program) when he discussed the swap in January with Prime Minister Turnbull.  Trump got it and understood intuitively that it is a DUMB deal.

WaPo:

In November, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, responsible for the USRAP in the Senate, could not get the exact number out of the Obama bureacrats at the State Department.

We’ve known for a while that President Trump berated Australia’s prime minister on a Jan. 28 phone call; The Washington Post reported on it back then.

What we didn’t know then was how little Trump understood the policy that was discussed on the call.

According to a transcript of the call unearthed by The Post’s Greg Miller, the deal to resettle refugees was actually brought up first on the call by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who wanted assurance that the U.S. government would stand by its commitment in light of Trump’s stance on other refugees. After some discussion of the Islamic State and Christian refugees more generally, Turnbull says, “This is a very big issue for us, particularly domestically, and I do understand you are inclined to a different point of view than the vice president.” 

[This is revealing, so Pence was already talking to Turnbull about the refugee swap deal, sooner than eight days after the inauguration?—ed]

Trump then starts the back-and-forth by noting that someone had just described the deal to him. But then he uses inaccurate numbers: “Somebody told me yesterday that close to 2,000 people are coming who are really probably troublesome.”

The reporter shows his ignorance (and bias!) because it wasn’t until recently that the target number discussed (to be admitted to your towns) is in the range of 1,250.  Back when Trump talked to Turnbull we know that it was close to 2,000 as noted by Senator Grassley, hereGrassley reported in November that the number being considered is CLASSIFIED.

Continue reading the WaPo here as reporter (Aaron Blake) twists himself into a pretzel trying to make Trump look foolish.  I think it is clear Trump understood exactly why Turnbull was so desperate for a deal!

For new readers, know this:

This sort of deal is outside of the ordinary resettlement process. It would set a horrible precedent!

So, if it goes through in October (the new fiscal year), as the Aussie government hopes it will, Trump will lose me for sure.

16 Responses to “Australia refugee deal murkier by the minute; poster story for refugee program gone wrong!”

  1. icthelite said

    I find it very odd that these ?refugees? always seem to be young men. Why are t hey not home fighting for their freedom. Who is taking care of their families? I think they should all be sent back to their own countries. If a million of these souls are being relocated because they fear for their lives that’s a million fighters that could be fighting for what the are hoping to find somewhere else.
    Also, I’d have to give serious thought as to whether or not I would want to aid someone stupid enough to burn down their dwelling. Do we really want to add someone with that mentality to our gene pool?

    Like

    • FatherJon said

      It’s often been remarked on that at least 80% of the so-called refugees are young males, many escaping military service or seeking economic betterment. It’s also been pointed out that they often lie about their age too in order to gain advantage from immigration due to presenting as ‘minors’ . This report comes from Sweden –
      https://www.thelocal.se/20170803/new-results-of-swedens-asylum-age-assessment-tests-released

      Like

      • In Islam, due to polygamy and having to pay the “bride price” (a years wages) to the wife’s father, the economic bottom 40% of men will never be qualified to be married. This is a great personal shame on them which can be unbearable so they attempt to leave their hometown to get away from the shame.

        In the Middle East, many Arab men are finding mail order brides in China and the Philippines in order not to have to pay the bride price.

        Like

        • Ann Corcoran said

          Very interesting point!

          Like

          • Under Islam, the wealthy man can have 4 wives and unlimited concubines as long as they are all treated equally. Obviously, if one man has two or more wives, etc. he is depriving other men of wives beyond the first wife married. This creates inherent instability in Islamic societies. This may account for the great amount of violence and killing needed to “cull the herd” of single males down to manageable size by governments constantly sending single, un-marriageable males on endless jihads to find glory, a wive or death.

            Like

        • FatherJon said

          ‘In the Middle East, many Arab men are finding mail order brides in China and the Philippines in order not to have to pay the bride price.’

          And many of those women are horribly mistreated by the men who buy them from those countries.

          Like

  2. Globalists’ Big Idea: Grow GDP with 2 Immigrants for Every American Turning 18: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/04/business-urges-population-bomb-expand-economy/

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Why is the US taxpayer always being forced to take the Third World’s rejects?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. FatherJon said

    It’s pretty clear to me, the average Aussie, that Trump is saying ‘No way, Jose’ to our ineffectual Prime Minister Turnbull despite the niceties. What’s not clarified is where do the Central American refugees fit in? Are they already inside the USA or are they held in camps in Mexico or Central America? From a personal point of view, I’d rather have 1,200 culturally-appropriate Latinos take up residence here than the 1,200 Muslims on Nauru and Manus. It would be a win-win for Australia although I sympathise with Trump who’d be getting the rough end of the pineapple.
    We’ll see how it pans out but I think we’re stuck with working out what to do with our 1,200 Muslims. They’ve already knocked back up to $30,000 each to return whence they came so they’re clearly choosing to play the long game.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ann Corcoran said

      The Central Americans you would get in the deal are in Costa Rica. They are most likely Salvadorans, Hondurans etc. They aren’t being held there,they just got that far and are filing for refugee status there. They really are not a US problem except we are now paying HIAS, one of our refugee contractors to “process” them. As I said previously, a deal by definition is that each side gets something … I see nothing here for us.

      Like

  5. Mist'ears Mom said

    Sorry link did not work, I will try again:
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-australia-exclusive-idUSKBN1A00EG?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

    Like

  6. Mist'ears Mom said

    I had read that our officials sent there to vet these ‘refugees’ had left the islands rather suddenly in the middle of this vetting process. I will try to find the article and post. It seems to make sense as it happened around the same time the upheavals within started.
    My response is that they probably fled to save their lives-which is a good thing and sheds light on the actual type of ‘refugees’ Australia is trying desperately trying to off load onto us.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. The primary “work” these men are apt to be interested in when they are in a white, westernized country is interbreeding with indigenous, fertile, young women.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. katmanwon said

    He already lost me.

    Screw Trump I’m from Texas.

    On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 6:36 AM, Refugee Resettlement Watch wrote:

    > Ann Corcoran posted: “I’ve lost track of how many posts I’ve written on a > refugee swap deal that Obama (and Anne Richard) engineered in the closing > months of the Obama administration that would bring over 1,000 rejected > ‘refugees’ to your towns in the coming months. (See archi” >

    Like

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: