Obama: Importing the Third World and Giving Them Deluxe Refugee Benefits

CentralsFamilyTrainJuly14-500x348Limits to Growth, April 24, 2015:

The Senate Immigration Committee held a hearing on Thursday titled, Eroding the Law and Diverting Taxpayer Resources: An Examination of the Administration’s Central American Minors Refugee/Parole Program. Chair Jeff Sessions used the forum to sort through the radical changes made unilaterally by the administration regarding thousands of illegal aliens flooding north from Central America.

The upshot is the Obama administration is opening the border to huge numbers of backward Third Worlders who will need lots of government freebies to survive and will gratefully vote Democrat in the future.

One of the experts testifying at the hearing was Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies, and she appeared Friday on Fox News with Neil Cavuto:

VAUGHAN: What the administration is doing is two things: first, in order to justify admitting huge numbers of folks from Central America, a lot of them are kids, they’ve basically unilaterally changed the definition of who is a refugee to cover people who live in very violent places where maybe a criminal organization goes around threatening people or if women suffered domestic violence at the hands of their husbands. They’re even saying female single heads of households can qualify the same as somebody who is persecuted for their religious beliefs and allowing them to come into the country and immediately qualify for the huge array of services and benefits. . .

CAVUTO: Once granted refugee status, an individual has open access to federal welfare, to your point, work permits, ability to receive green cards, citizenship. What the administration’s doing here is it stated that extends parole to such individuals in the United States as well, further contravening law — is that true?

VAUGHAN: That’s the other thing. Yes, if someone doesn’t meet even their expanded definition of a refugee, what they would like to do for many of the Central Americans and they’ve already done it in the case of Haitians say, we’re going to admit you under a status called parole, or actually let them enter as parolees, and just say even though you came under parole, we’re going to say you’re a refugee to get all of these services at the expense of the federal government and also state taxpayers who have to pick up the tab for lots of resettlement services that are provided. The huge expansion of these programs is going to get enormously costly for the communities where these folks resettle because they tend to cluster in different places around the country and it becomes a big burden and a distortion in the job market and in all sorts of other ways.

We as a country want to be generous to real refugees and when it’s appropriate to allow some people to come here to be resettled, but the Obama administration is basically going out and recruiting people in parts of the world that you know have more difficult circumstances and say come on in and we’ll support you, completely at odds with this idea that eventually immigrants would be self-sufficient. Instead they’re becoming dependent on the government.

CAVUTO: Yeah, and we certainly widened the pool in a definition of who’s eligible as a result.

VAUGHAN: At this point, it could be anybody in the world if you extend it that way.


Text of Vaughan’s testimony, “An Examination of the Administration’s Central American Minors Refugee/Parole Program”


Admin Confirms Central American Refugees Eligible For Food Stamps, Medicaid, Cash Assistance


CJR: If I hadn’t read Leo Hohmann’s article “How to know when migrant gravy train arrives in your town” I probably wouldn’t have noticed the flyer laying on a table at a local BB&T bank advertising this event: 

Also see:

How to know when migrant gravy train arrives in your town

Immigration Document OverloadWND, by LEO HOHMANN, April 23, 2015:

What are the signs that your community has been secretly selected for an infusion of refugees from Muslim nations like Syria or Somalia, or migrant workers from Central America?

The Obama White House released a report last week on the integration of immigrants and refugees that provides some clues.

It could be something as simple as a new billboard along the highway touting the contributions of diverse immigrant populations and refugees. Or maybe you’ll hear a radio spot or see a TV ad delivering the same type of message.

Your city council may pass a proclamation “celebrating” and “welcoming” the “cultural diversity” and economic benefits of refugees and other “new Americans.”

Your local public library will start hosting “story times” that glorify the role of immigrants and the value of diversity in your community.

You may also see a new HUD-backed subsidized housing project rising from the ground. But the biggest sign that new arrivals are on their way, will be the “messaging” sent out through local media and official government offices.

Below is an example of the ads circulating in North Carolina sponsored by a group called Welcoming America, which was started in 2010 with seed money from billionaire George Soros and now works with the federal government to influence Americans’ attitudes toward immigration.

It’s all part of a strategy, reported on last week by WND, to “water the soil” and “plant seedlings” into host communities, also called “receiving communities.”

WND also reported last week how the federal government withholds key information from the public in host communities until right before or after refugees arrive, and how one congressman, Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., is demanding answers to 17 questions about the program.

Obama’s ramped-up strategy to integrate new immigrants is about to be unfurled upon unsuspecting cities and counties across the U.S. They will be expected to follow the federal plan to “build welcoming communities” that empower migrants and refugees, turning them into “new Americans.”

Once the soil has been prepared, the seedlings will arrive. And the seedlings, according to those planning the changes for your city or town, need to be nurtured and cultivated into healthy communities of their own. They will eventually be fully “integrated,” meaning they are firmly established and able to grow within their host community, eventually overtaking the host.

The plans to transform America through immigration, as spelled out in the new White House report, involves almost every government agency working in tandem with community organizers from immigrant-rights groups like National Council for La Raza and the National Partnership for New Americans. The White House task force is headed by Cecilia Munoz, former top executive with La Raza and now Obama’s top domestic policy adviser.

The report is chock full of programs, goals, plans and strategies to build welcoming “receiving communities” and give immigrants all they need to prosper economically, linguistically and politically.

The document is permeated with Orwellian euphemisms, starting with the title, “Strengthening Communities by Welcoming all Residents,” and continuing with its declaration of the “economic benefits of immigrant and refugee integration.”

Critics argue the plan will do the exact opposite, weakening stable communities by delivering a steady dose of low-skilled immigrants who will place a burden on schools and social services. The new arrivals are likely to be seen working as hotel maids, toiling in meat-packing plants, as cashiers at big-box stores, dishwashers or other low-wage jobs that require food stamps, subsidized housing and other forms of government assistance.

Judicial Watch, the Washington, D.C.-based government watchdog organization, predicted Wednesday that cities and counties will be “strong-armed into participating in this immigrant welcoming effort.”

One way that could happen is through the withholding of various federal block grants for development projects for cities that don’t participate, while showering communities that do participate with new grant money.

The report cites, “A large body of academic research has shown that immigration benefits the U.S. economy as a whole, the communities in which immigrants live and the businesses where they work.”

Conveniently omitted, says Judicial Watch’s review of the report, are the devastating impacts of illegal immigration, “like the billions of dollars American taxpayers spend annually on their education, health care and incarceration.”

The White House plan calls for the marshaling of almost every federal agency to participate in creating welcoming communities.

For “effective integration we need a comprehensive national and local effort that draws on the strengths and capacity of all sectors of society and all levels of government – a ‘whole of society’ approach,” the report states.

Partners will include schools, libraries, corporations, universities, and community-based organizations, to name a few. In other words, an army of community organizers, bureaucrats and technocrats who will soon descend on local communities nationwide pushing for more welcoming environments for refugees and immigrants.

The plan calls for using existing federal funding opportunities and putting pressure on Congress to create a new “revenue stream” that will fund a host of new integration programs.

Obama created the Task Force on New Americans in November after he unilaterally granted amnesty to more than 5 million illegal aliens. The administration’s robust refugee resettlement program has been added to the mix with a focus on refugees from Somalia, Iraq, Syria, the Democratic Republic of Congo and other Muslim nations.

Making immigrants feel welcome

The task force will also consider holding regional summits to encourage state, regional and local planning.”

States already ahead of the game in preparing to welcome “new Americans” are Illinois, Michigan, Massachusetts and New York, the report said. These states have created new offices to serve immigrants, offered new programs to meet their needs, and provided mobile units to “help new Americans feel welcome.”

Illinois, for example, uses mobile units to hold “service fairs” or “welcoming days.” These programs will “ensure that approximately 11,000 new Americans receive access to services,” the report says.

The cities of Dayton, Ohio; Baltimore, Maryland; High Point, North Carolina; Chicago; New York City; Los Angeles and Boston were held up as examples for other cities to emulate in the way of welcoming and integrating new immigrants and refugees.

Boston, L.A., New York and Chicago were all lauded for creating new bureaucratic offices with the sole purpose being to “serve immigrant populations.”

Chicago, for instance, created a “New American Plan” in 2012 that includes “strategies to ensure that the city’s diverse immigrant population is empowered.”

Cities are also encouraged in the report to “celebrate World Refugee Day on June 20″ with film screenings, soccer tournaments and community dialogues.

‘Feeding growth in government’

Steven Comarata, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, said these types of government overreaches should be expected when immigration levels are as high as they are today.

“It seems almost inevitable with an immigration policy of open borders and the numbers that we’ve seen, both legal and illegal, coming into the country, to the point where one in 10 Americans are now recent immigrants,” he said.

According to new Census projections, the U.S. immigrant population is on track to reach its highest percentage ever of the overall population in just eight years.

immigration-graph2“The rise of identity- and grievance-based politics will take over,” Comarata said. “Immigration is not the reasons for multiculturalism, but it is the pure oxygen that allows the fires of the progressive ideology to burn so hot.”

Comarata’s organization, CIS, has been pushing Congress to reduce the numbers of immigrants entering the country, which would reduce the pressure on government to accommodate their needs.

“Now you could say, ‘Hey, they can fend for themselves,’ but the reality is the presence of enormous numbers will create tremendous pressure for the government to do more,” he said.

You can say, ‘Tough, what do I care,’ but the fact of the matter is that in that environment the argument for the government to do more is going to be heard all the more sympathetically, by folks who are not even necessarily liberal. They’re going to say, ‘Hey, we’ve got an explosion of child poverty.’”

For example, he said 68 percent of the growth in the uninsured population comes from new immigrants and their children. “And what is one of the main arguments for Obamacare? It’s the growth in the uninsured.

“So immigration, without question, creates pressure for more government programs. It’s a powerful motivator, and that’s where we’re headed.”

Studies show that immigrants themselves generally have a more positive view of government action than indigenous Americans, Comarata said.

“So you can see why Democrats have an interest, even if it means there may be fewer benefits available for their traditional voting bloc,” he said. “Their political interests trump concern for their constituents.”

So these are not your great-grandmother’s type of immigrant, when loads of Italians, Germans and Irish came to the U.S. in the early 1900s with nothing and were forced to work hard and scrape their way to a middle-class lifestyle.

“That era is gone and long dead,” Comarata said. “In 1900, federal and state and local expenditures amounted to 5 percent of GDP; it’s now up to 35 percent of GDP. That was before the rise of things like race-specific policies, before the rise of identity-based and grievance-based politics. La Raza didn’t exist back then. We’re looking at truly unprecedented numbers and percentages, and you get an inevitable rise in government services and the overall size of government.”

Comarata also stresses that legal immigration is a much bigger piece of the overall immigration pie than illegal immigration, with 1.1 million legal immigrants entering the country each year. That compares to approximately 100,000 to 200,000 illegals.

“And we’re having absolutely no debate at all on that,” he said.

More from the report

Here’s a sampling of goals and objectives contained in the White House task force’s 70-page report:

  • Reduce “barriers to citizenship,” such as making the citizenship test easier for elderly immigrants.
  • Train immigrants and refugees to be citizen activists, expanding opportunities for them to “engage in their receiving communities,” because, coming from various Third World environments “they may not be aware of its importance or how they can effect change at the local, state and federal levels.”
  • Lower citizenship fees for some immigrants and allow others to pay by credit card.
  • Make sure immigrants and refugees wanting to start small businesses have access to start-up capital.
  • The federal government will actively “encourage local governments to develop and implement local immigrant and refugee integration strategies – providing technical assistance and other opportunities to participating communities and put them on the path to building welcoming communities.”
  • The federal task force will provide a toolkit to the “willing but unable” cities and counties “to guide these communities in their welcoming efforts and share information on federal funding streams and initiatives.”
  • A New Americans Corps will be created through the existing AmeriCorps volunteer program and these armies of volunteers will work to “build capacity” in the movement to welcome and integrate New Americans into communities nationwide.
  • Emphasize existing funding opportunities to assist new Americans.
  • Increase opportunities for communities to use federal funding streams to develop and implement local integration plans.
  • “Culturally and linguistically appropriate services” must be delivered to immigrants in health and health care and other areas of need.
  • Organizations are expected “to provide effective and respectful quality care and services that are responsive to diverse cultural practices, preferred languages, health literacy levels, and other communication needs.”


Also see:

And check out:


Numbers USA – Educating Americans on the need for policies of controlled immigration for the national interest.

Get on their mailing list and –



Spencer, Camerota and Phares Discuss Sharia No-Go Zones and the Charlie Hebdo jihadis

Published on Jan 9, 2015 by JihadWatchVideo

Robert Spencer, Steve Camerota and Walid Phares appeared on the Sean Hannity Show on Fox New on January 8, 2015, to discuss the Charlie Hebdo jihad mass murderers and Sharia No-Go Zones in France.

Oath of Deception?

imagesCA9XA4JYby IPT News:

Belief in radical Islamic ideology could be grounds to deport immigrants, even after they’ve naturalized, a provocative report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) says.

The report, National Security Threats Should Be Denaturalized, comes from “a retired government employee with many years of experience in immigration administration, law enforcement, and national security matters” who writes under a pseudonym.

People already can be blocked from naturalization for affiliating with totalitarian groups, or engaging in or advocating violence to overthrow the U.S. government. The report argues that the totalitarian prohibition can apply to adherents of radical Islam.

“Why totalitarianism? Because under radical strains of Islam, such as Salafism, it is impossible to reconcile separation of church and state,” the report says. “All civil authority bows to the wisdom of religious clerics in a theocracy. The best existing example (if one can use that descriptor loosely) of such a theocracy in action is the Islamic Republic of Iran. The worst example in recent memory is the Taliban when it ruled Afghanistan. Can one doubt that both examples point clearly to a totalitarian form of government in which no form of peaceful dissension or religious liberty is tolerated? In fact, dissension and religious differences are dealt with brutally.”

Under the proposal, someone could be barred from becoming a citizen if he or she is a follower of radical Islam to the extent that Islam and sharia law should supersede secular law and liberty in the United States. And citizenship can be stripped if it later is determined the person failed to disclose those beliefs.

The report describes the two existing provisions for denaturalizing citizens under such circumstances. But there has been little focus or interest among federal authorities to aggressively pursue such cases, even when the offenders have been convicted of serious national security crimes.

The CIS report identifies 51 cases since 2003 involving naturalized citizens who were charged with and/or convicted of national security related violations. Of them, 34 (66 percent) were from Islamic countries or otherwise identified as being involved in an Islamist security threat violation case.

Denaturalized people revert to their prior immigration status, usually a permanent resident alien. But resident aliens convicted of certain crimes, particularly national security crimes, are subject to deportation. Even absent a criminal conviction, permanent residents can be deported if they obtained that status through fraud or misrepresentation.

This CIS report raises noteworthy issues that have lingered for nearly a decade. And while federal authorities appear to be lethargic in the pursuit of even national security denaturalization cases, there have been some successes such as Fawaz Damra and Abdurahman M. Alamoudi. Even the notorious criminal case against Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) operative Sami Al-Arian began as a naturalization fraud investigation.

But a handful of victories in a sea of ignored cases is not really success. There is much room for improvement and, ironically, improvement may not even require legislative change but no more than shift in focus and willingness by executive branch agencies responsible for investigating and prosecuting the violations. This matter appears ripe for congressional inquiry. The CIS report has opened that door.

See also:

Frank Gaffney: Stop Shariah Immigration (counterjihadreport.cm)

Frank Gaffney: Stop Shariah Immigration

The 10th part of Frank Gaffney’s The Muslim Brotherhood in America course is titled “What’s To Be Done?” It is a one hour comprehensive plan for what must be done “to defeat the most serious and imminent of such dangers in our time: the Islamist doctrine of shariah and the efforts of its adherents to impose it world-wide, on Muslims and non-Muslims alike, through violent means or by stealth.”

At 43:43 min. into the video, Gaffney addresses muslim immigration as one of several recommended Federal level  legislative initiatives. He makes the case that the United States must preclude immigration by adherents to shariah as a matter of national sovereignty. The following is an excerpt from the video:

This course has documented how the threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood’s civilization jihad is being compounded by the continuing admission into this country as visitors or permanent residents of still more shariah adherent Muslims including Saudi trained Imams and unassimilable refugee populations. Attorney James Edwards, a fellow of the Center For Immigration Studies noted that in September 2005 in a center white paper entitled “Keeping Extremists Out; The History of Ideological Exclusion and the Need for it’s Revival” that there is ample Precedent for excluding would be visitors or permanent residents who adhere to shariah’s seditious doctrine.  As Mr. Ewdwards put it, “Excluding and removing aliens who exhibited unwanted characteristics has been traditional American practice. Whether by colonial, state or Federal governments, the right to exclude and deport non-citizens has been vigorously exercised in this nation. Indeed, such a right is inherent to the idea of a sovereign nation” Most recently during the cold war, the US government recognized the danger of admitting not just members of the communist party, but “individuals in any way connected or associated” with it. It restricted their admission under a statute known as the McCarryn-Walter Act of 1950. What is more, that act barred those who “ever knowingly aided or supported the communist party directly or indirectly through another organization”. This is a critically important precedent because of  the analogous situation that exists today with respect to the myriad Muslim Brotherhood front groups who have modeled their subversive penetration of our civil society, institutions and government on Soviet Communist tradecraft. The same logic should apply to those today who adhere t a no less seditious ideology that some have dubbed “Communism with a God”. Notably, organizations like CAIR, ISNA, MPAC and others bear a strong resemblance to the multitude of Comunist party front groups employed by the Soviets during the cold war. And their division of labor in underning the United States from within. The bottom line is hat we must not continue the practice of admitting, let alone inviting in enemies of this country whose adherence to Shariah obliges them to seek our submission and destruction.