Capital Research Center publishes an overview of the US Refugee Admissions Program

Refugee Resettlement Watch, by Ann Corcoran, September 16, 2018:

James Simpson has done an outstanding job of pulling together facts about the history of how the US came to be the top refugee resettlement country in the world. Hint: It all began with the UN!

And, then in this three-part series gives readers the facts about who we are bringing to America and how much it costs us—the US taxpayer.

He begins his serialized report this way:

Resettling Refugees: An International Agenda

Summary: A vast network of foundations, non-profits, government entities and political organizations have a vested interest in the continued growth of the resettlement of refugees in America. Because they receive billions of dollars in federal grant money, publicly-financed, tax-exempt organizations have significant incentives to support political candidates and parties that will keep these programs alive. These organizations need to be thoroughly audited and the current network of public/private immigrant advocacy and resettlement organizations needs to be completely overhauled. Resettling refugees should be a voluntary, genuinely charitable activity, removing all the perverse incentives government funding creates.

The refugee resettlement program is popular with many policymakers. It enjoys bipartisan support in Congress and state houses because it supplies low-wage, low skill labor that many big businesses crave, while enabling supporters to embrace “diversity” and thus avoid the Left’s favorite attacks and mischaracterizations: “bigot,” “racist,” “xenophobe,” “Islamophobe,” etc. This faux-moralizing on the Left stifles a necessary conversation our nation sorely needs. Meanwhile, the Left’s true motive is to import ever more people from third-world nations that are likely to become reliable Democrat voters once they achieve citizenship.

Under the Trump presidency, the United States’ refugee resettlement has been temporarily reduced, but by no means curtailed. A change in administration could resuscitate it overnight. There are many objectionable aspects of this program, not the least of which is finding resources to fund this enormous undertaking. The difficulty associated with assessing the true costs of the programs key to resettling refugees presents another obstacle to policymakers at every level of government.

Continue reading here for a history of the program.

Then here is Part II:

It is important for readers to know that although we most often talk about the actual Refugee admissions numbers, there are tens of thousands more considered ‘refugees’ by the US government for the purpose of providing federal dollars for their care as they become ‘New Americans.’

Resettling Refugees: Who’s Coming to America?

According to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), refugees are:

[P]eople who have been persecuted or fear they will be persecuted on account of race, religion, nationality, and/or membership in a particular social group or political opinion.

This mirrors the U.N. definition established at the 1951 U.N. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. It is important to note here, however, that under these definitions, “individuals who have crossed an international border fleeing generalized violence are not considered refugees.” This includes large numbers of people who are regularly resettled anyway, for example some of the Syrians fleeing that country’s conflict, and most—if not all Somalis.

Those who meet the definition include:

~refugees (those seeking protection in the United States who are not already in the country),

~asylum seekers or asylees (those who apply for asylum after coming to the U.S.),

~Cuban/Haitian Entrants,

~Special Immigrant Visas (SIV) and

~trafficking Victims.

The Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) program is also administered by the Office of Refugee Resettlement, although UACs do not meet the definition of “refugee.”

Table I below provides up-to-date estimates for each category.

Get a load of these numbers!

Simpson table 1

The table shows that this category of legal entry to the US is a much bigger problem than the one we usually discuss on these pages which is the Refugee column.

Don’t miss the total admitted in the last full year of the Obama presidency—269,491!

But, see that the Trump Administration is presiding over the arrival of a huge number (higher than Obama’s welcome!) of Special Immigrant Visa holders from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Continue here.

And, last but not least! You really need to read the whole thing yourself, but prepare to be sick when you see how many millions of dollars are flowing out of the US Treasury to hundreds of non-profits who are in one way or another in the business of bringing in and then spreading refugees and other migrants around the US while lobbying for ever higher admissions numbers (aka paying clients!).

Part III is here

Resettling Refugees: Social and Economic Costs

Simpson begins with the usual nine federal contractors, but that is only the tip of the iceberg!

Federal Refugee Resettlement Grants

cws protest at WH 2

Think about this!  Earlier this year Church World Service and the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society helped organize this protest against the President. Combined, those two refugee contractors consumed $620 million taxpayer dollars in the last ten years.  Why are we paying for this? https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/2018/01/28/church-world-service-and-hias-join-cair-to-protest-at-white-house/

The nine VOLAGs, their many affiliates, and unaccompanied alien children contractors all receive funding from the federal government to resettle the various refugee categories. As mentioned earlier, unaccompanied alien children do not meet the definition of “refugee,” however their resettlement is managed through the Office of Refugee Resettlement and they are included when calculating the total cost of the overall program.

Most funding comes in the form of grants. Prime awards are grants directly from the federal government to the state or the contractor. Sub-awards are those given to contractors by other contractors or state governments that received the prime grant. They are left out to avoid double counting. Table III below enumerates prime grants to VOLAGs and unaccompanied alien children contractors for refugee resettlement and related programs. Some of the VOLAGs, for example the Ethiopian Community Development Council, focus almost entirely on refugee resettlement. Others, like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, International Rescue Committee, and World Relief Corporation of the National Association of Evangelicals, have a broader mission.

Of the latter, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is the largest. As Table III shows, in FY 2018 USCCB received $47.7 million for resettlement purposes. However, USCCB participates in other federal grant programs and that year received a total of $363.9 million from the federal government.

Here is a chart you need to keep handy. Prepare to be sick!

Billions of dollars have flowed to the refugee contractors in the last ten years alone!

Simpson table 2

The nine major contractors (VOLAGS) that monopolize the US Refugee Admissions Program are these:

Church World Service (CWS)
Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC) (secular)
Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM) (DFMS is its other name)
Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS)
International Rescue Committee (IRC) (secular)
Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS)
US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) (secular)
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)
World Relief Corporation (WR)

Thanks to Jim Simpson for letting us know just how much each is being paid from the US Treasury!

Please, please take time to read the rest of Part III, it is stunning the amount of your money being distributed to non-profits who then act as political agitation groups!

And, these dollars do not include the cost of welfare, education, medical care, housing, etc. that you pay for!

Tell the White House to reform the whole program and begin by getting rid of middlemen federal contractors!

This is no way to run a government!

Also see:

If the President foolishly pushes Jeff Sessions out of the Justice Department, the Senate will never confirm a replacement who would carry out the immigration control agenda that Sessions has undertaken.

In Germany, the ‘Immigration’ Worm Has Turned

Fed up (Bernd Settnik/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images)

PJ Media, by Michael Walsh, July 8, 2018:

I’m in Berlin at the moment, staying not far from Checkpoint Charlie, through which I passed many times during the Cold War, and not far from the spot where, sledgehammer in hand, I did my small bit to dismantle the Berlin Wall in November of 1989. So much has changed in the nearly 30 years since that memorable moment: McDonald’s and KFC have franchises on either side of the intersection of the Friedrichstrasse and the Zimmerstrasse, where the Wall briefly opened to allow a narrow passage from the American sector’s principal checkpoint across a short block flanked on both sides by the Todesstreifen of barbed-wire and machine-gun free-fire fields. On the western side — actually the southern side, by the compass — the fearsome Wall was gaily painted with graffiti; on the other, it was a blank slate of gray concrete, fully reflective of the Stalinist Leftist orthodoxy of the only captive nation that even remotely tried to make a go of the Marxist economic, social, and moral lie.

Now, three decades after the Wall came down, I’m back in East Berlin talking to old and new German friends — most of them Ossisor East Germans — about the current state of Germany’s overriding social and political issue: the influx of more than one million cultural aliens, mostly from the Muslim ummah and thus by faith and profession profoundly opposed to Western Judeo-Christian civilization. And their answer is… not good for the Merkel administration.

Since the end of WWII, the German impulse has been to apologize for… well, just about everything since Arminius wiped out the Romans in the Teutoburg Forest in the year 9 AD. And, to be fair, they’ve had a lot to apologize for. In the western sectors, occupied by the French, the British, and the Americans in the war’s aftermath and united to form West Germany, they quickly got their economic system up and running, restored much of the infrastructure that had been obliterated, and got on with the business of building a social democracy that became a model for the rest of Western Europe. But the restoration of Germany society was in part paid for by the taxpayers of the United States, who supported an enormous military force (upwards of 200,000 military personnel at the time of reunification in 1990) as the U.S. and NATO faced off against the Soviets and the Warsaw Pact nations across Charlie and all over Europe.

The American presence preserved the peace and, eventually, was critical in the West’s victory in the Cold War. But it was bad for Germany in that it gave the Germans the luxury to take the “high moral ground” and abjure their own self-defense while they poured money into social programs. Having been effectively a ward of NATO and America, the Germans unhappily combined their war guilt with the mistaken moral superiority of their newfound pacifism.

The result was that they were completely unprepared for the consequences of their Ossi-raised chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision to allow free entry to the “Syrian” “refugees” in 2015, a vast trekking horde of mostly male Muslims of military age from as far away as Afghanistan, who marched on the rich countries of the West, passing through Greece and Hungary and Italy on their way to the greener pastures of France, England, and Germany. Proudly proclaiming a “welcoming culture” and mouthing Merkel’s slogan, “Wir shaffen das” (We can handle this), Germany opened its arms to the “diversity” delusion.

What the Germans expected to welcome were people fleeing oppression, and who would abide by German norms of social civility, which include peace and (especially) quiet, who would quickly learn to converse and interact on a sophisticated level — who would become, in short, exactly like most Germans. What they got was an Islamic rabble wholly uninterested in Germany except how to exploit its hospitality while loudly complaining about it. The molestation of more than a thousand German girls in Cologne by Muslim “refugees” on New Year’s Eve in 2015 was the first indication that North African sexual norms were coming to roost in Germany. And while the government has downplayed “migrant” crimes against the local women, the word still gets out and around.

In Germany, the case of a young Muslim refugee charged with the rape and murder of a teenage girl has captured media attention and rocked Germany’s Jewish community: The victim, 14-year-old Susanna Feldmann, was Jewish. Missing since May 22, the girl’s  body was found June 6 buried in a shallow grave near her hometown of Mainz. The case has rattled Germany, which is beset with worries about crime emanating from the large Muslim refugee population — many of whom are young, single men, frustrated and aimless.

While many facts have come out since the body of Susanna Feldmann was found and the suspect was arrested and interrogated, the incident still feeds populist speculation and anger at German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who in 2015 opened the door to more than a million refugees from the war-torn Middle East on humanitarian grounds. Many are young, single men between 16 and 30 years old — like Ali Bashar,  the 20-year-old former asylum seeker who admitted killing Susanna.

Now the realization is dawning that few, if any, of Mutti Merkel’s kinder are going to turn into Germans or become assimilated into the host culture. The realization has been delayed by the international media’s cultural-Marxist insistence on conflating citizenship with ethnic nationality and declaring there is no difference between them. This may be true in the United States, which is unique among nations, but most definitely is not in continental Europe, where the modern nation-state first evolved; in Germany, the jus sanguinis made possible the prompt repatriations of the Volga Germans — whose families had lived in Russia for hundreds of years — after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Meanwhile, until 1990 when Germany introduced a very limited form of birthright citizenship, children of foreigners born and raised in Germany had no call on German citizenship at all.

It’s not a conclusion most Germans are comfortable with, but as the gap between fantasy and reality widens, inevitable conclusions are being reached. Merkel’s recent climbdown on “immigration” may have temporarily saved her administration, but it’s only a matter of time before she falls, to be replaced with someone who realizes “Wir kann das nicht schaffen.”

Chancellor Angela Merkel, who staked her legacy on welcoming hundreds of thousands of migrants into Germany, agreed on Monday to build border camps for asylum seekers and to tighten the border with Austria in a political deal to save her government. It was a spectacular turnabout for a leader who has been seen as the standard-bearer of the liberal European order but who has come under intense pressure at home from the far right and from conservatives in her governing coalition over her migration policy.

Although the move to appease the conservatives exposed her growing political weakness, Ms. Merkel will limp on as chancellor. For how long is unclear. The nationalism and anti-migrant sentiment that has challenged multilateralism elsewhere in Europe is taking root — fast — in mainstream German politics.

Ms. Merkel agreed to the latest policy after an insurrection over migration policy led by her interior minister, Horst Seehofer, threatened to bring down her coalition. Mr. Seehofer demanded that Germany block migrants at the border if they have no papers, or have already registered in another European country. Ms. Merkel, who supports free movement across Europe’s borders, has been opposed to any moves effectively resurrecting border controls until Monday night, when she made the deal to stay in power.

Anyone who’s ever spent a week in Germany — and I’ve spent a good deal of my life here — could have known that Merkel’s social experiment in soft-headed egalitarianism was doomed to failure. The Islamic invasion of the West is succeeding in places like France, where it has taken advantage of the French civic dogma of laïcité and the residual anti-Christian sentiment of the French Revolution, first by having the religious trappings of Islam ignored and now, as the Muslim population grows, by forcing the French to take notice of their faith and demanding its open expression in contravention of French law. Meanwhile in Britain, the church founded by Henry VIII in a fit of pique, and currently presided over by a 92-year-woman, looks to be on its last legs except in a strictly ceremonial sense; into this spiritual void has rushed the former colonials of Africa and Pakistan, bringing vibrant Islam with them.

Whether the Germans are made of sterner stuff than the Brits and the French remains to be seen. Certainly, everyone is trying to tread as lightly as possible, tiptoeing around the unpleasant truths while trying to avoid the even-more-unpleasant consequences of Merkel’s folly. At this point, the best that can be hoped for is a halt to further invasion, rapid processing of the alleged “asylum” seekers and speedy repatriation of those found to be unqualified, even under the generosity of the German constitution’s Asylrecht — which has already undergone a considerable rollback since 1993.

It’s important to remember that the Germans have seen this movie before, starring the Turks, who came as Gastarbeiter in the 1960s and, rather than returning home the way the Spanish, Greeks and Italian guest workers largely did, stayed in Germany to evolve a parallel society in which they stayed Muslim and Turkish. But the non-assimilation of a new, restive group of militant Muslims who’ve arrived not in search of a job but of a handout, is a whole new order of magnitude for Germany.

How will they react? With the Wall now gone for longer than it was up, Germans still shudder at the memory and don’t wish for Checkpoint Charlie to reappear in the form of restrictive immigration policies. But that Wall was built by the Communists, and meant to keep the East Germans in, whereas the nationalist movements now sweeping Europe want to keep Islam out — the way they have since the Battle of Lepanto and the Gates of Vienna. The Germans are going to have to decide, and quickly, which side of the Wall they’re looking at it. The future of Europe depends on it.

***

With Cartels In Control, There Are No Easy Answers To The Border Crisis

Much of Mexico and Central America is ruled by cartels, and until we come to terms with the role they play in migrant smuggling, the crisis will worsen.

The Federalist, by Daniel Davidson, June 26, 2018:

In the debate over President Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy on illegal immigration, pundits and politicians from across the political spectrum are offering simplistic solutions to the problems along our southern border.

On the Left, outrage over family separation has morphed into outrage over family detention with Trump’s announcement last week that families would be kept together but still prosecuted for illegal entry. Although they won’t come right out and say it, most liberals would like to return to a policy of catch and release, in which families caught crossing illegally are assigned a court date and released into the country.

On the Right, many seem to think it’s possible to solve illegal immigration simply by building a wall, or carrying out mass extrajudicial deportations, or separating parents and children as a deterrent.

Libertarians, too, are grasping for simple solutions. Over at Reason, J.D. Tuccille suggests that “better smugglers” are the best way to fight Trump’s draconian border policy. “Immigrants and their supporters should give some thought, and effort, to improved smuggling channels that treat migrants better than the existing criminal networks, and offer them a better chance of success,” writes Tuccille. He doesn’t mention the possibility that these new smugglers might find themselves at odds with the old smugglers, whose profits are at stake, or that jumping into Mexico’s migrant smuggling trade as a freelancer carries the risk of, say, being beheaded by one of the cartels.

Tuccille’s facile take is emblematic of the way the media has more or less ignored the role that “criminal networks” are playing in all of this—a role that makes easy solutions impossible. Throughout the border crisis, the media’s attention has been focused on the plight of Central American families and the chaos created by Trump’s zero-tolerance policy. Sure, the president likes to exaggerate how many MS-13 gang members are crossing the border, but neither Trump nor his detractors are thinking seriously about the escalating violence and accelerating social collapse now underway in Mexico and Central America, and how crime syndicates are playing into illegal immigration along the southern border.

Violence In Mexico Is Out Of Control—And Getting Worse

National elections in Mexico are set for July 1, and so far 121 political candidates, most of them running for local office, have been assassinated, along with dozens of their family members. Hundreds more have been attacked. On Thursday, a mayoral candidate in Ocampo, in the western state of Michoacan, was killed outside his residence—the third politician to be killed in Michoacan in just over a week. Federal police responded by arresting the entire town’s 27-officer police force on suspicion of involvement with the murder, another reminder that across Mexico drug cartels have infiltrated local and state police forces, political machines, and major industries. Candidates who speak out against corruption and vow to stand up to the cartels are especially in danger.

The violence is bad enough that the U.S. State Department has issued “do not travel” advisories for five Mexican states—Colima, Guerrero, Michoacan, Sinaloa, and Tamaulipas, whose northern boundary runs along the U.S. border from Brownsville to Laredo, Texas. These are the same travel advisories in place for countries like Libya, Syria, and North Korea. For much of the rest of Mexico, including nearly the entire U.S.-Mexico border, the State Department advises Americans to “reconsider travel.”

Tamaulipas is so dangerous right now that the interim governor of Nuevo Laredo, which sits directly across the Rio Grande from Laredo, has warned his citizens not to try to travel to the United States through Tamaulipas, and especially not through the town of Reynosa, across the river from McAllen, Texas. The official warning came a day after gunmen believed to be associated with the Gulf Cartel ambushed marines with the Mexican Navy three times in Nuevo Laredo, killing one and injuring 12 others. According to Mexican officials, the gunmen wore marine uniforms and drove vehicles with government markings. The ambushes only stopped when the marines called in a helicopter gunship for support.

Part of what’s driving the violence in northern Mexico is the breakdown of the Gulf and Los Zetas cartels. The most recent wave of violence began last April when Mexican authorities in Reynosa killed Juan Manuel Loisa Salinas, the leader of the Gulf Cartel. His death created a power vacuum, and various factions are now competing for a piece of the cross-border drug trade and other criminal enterprises.

Signs of the grisly cartel violence that was associated with Juárez back in 2010—severed heads, bodies hanging from highway overpasses—are now cropping up in border towns further east along the Rio Grande. In March, cartel gunmen dumped bags filled with dismembered body parts outside a gas station in Reynosa, where more than 500 people have been killed in the past 12 months.

Cartel violence is getting worse all over Mexico, not just along the border. Last year brought a record 28,710 homicidesnationwide, and this year is on track to surpass 30,000. May was the deadliest month ever recorded in Mexico since the government began releasing homicide data in 1998—2,890 people were killed, an average of four people per hour. By comparison, only Syria is more violent.

The Migrant Crisis Benefits The Cartels

Into this maelstrom have come a relentless stream of refugees and migrants from Central America, driven by worsening gang violence and poverty in the “Northern Triangle” of Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. Most of those crossing Mexico’s southern border are headed for safety and better prospects in the United States, which puts them at the mercy of Mexican cartels that have developed diverse income streams, from child organ trafficking to migrant smuggling.

In an interview with the Daily Beast last year, Eric Olson, deputy director for Latin America at the Wilson Center, explained that “Over the last several years more sophisticated criminal organizations have begun to take control of the migratory schemes,” citing growing competition among cartels “for control of routes and people coming through.”

Migrant smuggling has become a lucrative business for the cartels, which charge migrants anywhere from $3,000 to $10,000 a head for passage over the Rio Grande. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told a Senate Committee last month that human smuggling brings Mexican cartels more than $500 million a year, but that figure is almost certainly too low. The fact is, the cartels began to professionalize human smuggling around 2010, when large numbers of Central American migrants began coming through what had long been drug smuggling routes. In response, the cartels created a system of fees for migrants and dedicated personnel to police the routes.

The effect of tougher immigration enforcement like Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy is that the coyotes, as the smugglers are called, increase their fees while often misleading migrants about what they can expect once they cross into the United States, promising them visas or some form of amnesty. The coyotes are notorious for abandoning migrants on either side of the Rio Grande once they get paid, or, for those who run out of money, raping or kidnapping helpless customers, some of whom are sold into human trafficking near the border.

Because migrants must often pay for each leg of their journey up from Central America, including bribes for various law enforcement officials along the way, by the time they reach the U.S.-Mexico border they’re often out of money and completely at smugglers’ mercy. Migrants who can’t pay are sometimes forced to carry large packs of drugs over as payment for their fare.

Ironically, the tougher immigration enforcement is on the U.S. side, the greater the potential profits from migrant smuggling—not just because coyotes charge more but also because migrants and recently deported illegal immigrants have no other way of getting into the United States, and are willing to take greater risks. The mainstream media doesn’t seem to grasp this connection, which is why the Washington Post can publish a lengthy feature on a couple trying to illegally cross the border and barely mention the role of smugglers or the connection they have to larger criminal syndicates.

All of this is to say that we can’t have a serious conversation about the border crisis without being clear-eyed about the role the cartels play in societies that are essentially collapsing. Pretending that illegal immigration isn’t really a problem, as liberals and libertarians tend to do, ignores the close connection between human smuggling, drug trafficking, and cartel violence on both sides of the border. Pretending that it’s an easily solvable problem, as conservatives tend to do, is like claiming there’s an easy way to defeat Islamic radicalism—as if the cartels will agree to stop smuggling and trafficking just because we put up some more border fencing or ramp up deportations.

But until we get real about the almost unimaginable levels of violence and corruption in Mexico and Central America, our immigration crisis will fester, and eventually the chaos south of the border will spill over onto our side—no matter how high Trump builds his wall.

Also see:

More Than 1,000 Europeans Murdered, Maimed in Attacks by Islamist Asylum Seekers Since 2014

TOBIAS SCHWARZ/AFP/Getty Images

Breitbart, by Virginia Hale, June 17, 2018:

More than 1,000 people have been murdered or injured on European soil since 2014, in attacks carried out by Islamist asylum seekers and refugees, research has revealed.

Analysis by the Heritage Foundation  found that asylum seekers were involved in 32 of 194 Islamist plots that have targeted Europe over the past four years, resulting in 357 deaths and 1,678 injuries.

Between January 2014 and December 2017, the attacks involving migrants who were seeking asylum accounted for 182 of the fatalities and 814 injuries, according to the Daily Mail.

Noting that the terror threat on the continent has soared since 2016, when German chancellor Angela Merkel opened Europe’s borders, the the U.S. think tank warned that mass migration from the Global South made it “disturbingly simple” for Islamic extremists to enter EU nations.

“Ill-conceived immigration policies have made it easier for [jihadists] to strike,” the Heritage Foundation’s Robin Simcox said, commenting that “the fall-out from the decision to take in such a large amount of unvetted people in such a short time will continue for decades to come.”

“Europe has faced a severe threat from Islamist terrorism for years. Yet Chancellor Merkel’s decision to open Germany’s borders in 2015 unfortunately increased that threat,” he added.

“While only a minority of asylum seekers pose a security risk, the plots carried out by those exploiting migrant routes – in Paris, London, Berlin, Stockholm and elsewhere across Europe – demonstrate that even a low number of extremists can still cause huge amounts of damage,” said the report, which urged EU leaders to reduce risk by minimising the number of migrants the continent imports from conflict areas scarred by Islamic extremism.

“European leaders were either naïve about the risks or failed to communicate honestly with the public the impact that accepting such large amounts of people would have on security,” asserted Simcox, a national security and terrorism expert.

Breitbart London has previously reported how the Media Diversity Institute, which works with “media decision makers” and journalism watchdogs across Europe with the goal of promoting only positive views of minority and immigrant communities, has warned broadcasters against “sensationalising” immigrant-committed bloodshed against the continent’s native population.

Funded by globalist billionaire George Soros, the British government and European taxpayers through Brussels, the London-based NGO urged journalists to report on terror attacks on European soil in such a way that encourages the public to “avoid acting impulsively and to avoid spreading hate speech on social networks”.

When a Tunisian migrant murdered 84 by driving a 19-tonne truck into crowds of people celebrating Bastille Day, the institute blasted French media for including “shocking” testimony of the event, warning it risked causing “angry” people to post negative opinions of Islam and immigration on social media.

Germany’s Migrant Rape Crisis: “Failure of the State”

Gatestone Institute, by Soeren Kern, 

  • “Susanna is dead. Maria from Freiburg; Mia from Kandel; Mireille from Flensburg; and now Susanna from Mainz….” — Alice Weidel, co-leader AfD party.
  • “Susanna’s death is not a blind stroke of fate. Susanna’s death is the result of many years of organized irresponsibility and the scandalous failure of our asylum and immigration policies. Susanna is victim of an out-of-control leftwing multicultural ideology that stops at nothing to impose its sense of moral superiority.” — Alice Weidel, co-leader AfD party.
  • “On the day of Susanna’s murder, you [Merkel] testified in parliament that you have handled the migrant crisis responsibly. Do you dare to repeat that claim to Susanna’s parents?” — Alice Weidel, co-leader AfD party.

The rape and murder of a 14-year-old Jewish girl by a failed Iraqi asylum seeker has cast a renewed spotlight on Germany’s migrant rape crisis, which has continued unabated for years amid official complicity and public apathy.

Thousands of women and children have been raped or sexually assaulted in Germany since Chancellor Angela Merkel welcomed into the country more than one million mostly male migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

The latest crime, entirely preventable, is uniquely reprehensible in that it highlights in one act the many insidious consequences of Germany’s open-door migration policy — including the failure to vet those allowed into the country and the practice of releasing migrant criminals back onto German streets instead of incarcerating or deporting them.

The crime also exposes the gross negligence of Germany’s political class, which appears to be more concerned with preserving multiculturalism and the rights of predatory migrants than protecting German women and children from them.

Police say that Ali Bashar, a 20-year-old Iraqi Kurd, raped Susanna Maria Feldman, strangled her and then dumped her body in a wooded area alongside railroad tracks on the outskirts of Wiesbaden. Bashar then fled to Iraq on false identity papers.

Feldman had been missing from her home in Mainz since May 22. Her mother filed a missing person report on May 23. Police, however, did not even begin to search for the girl until more than a week later, when an unnamed 13-year-old boy, a migrant living in the same refugee shelter as Bashar, contacted the police. Feldman’s body was finally recovered on June 6.

14-year-old Susanna Maria Feldman (inset) was raped and murdered by Ali Bashar, a failed Iraqi asylum seeker in Germany. He dumped her body in a wooded area on the outskirts of Wiesbaden. (Image sources: Feldman – Facebook; Wiesbaden – Maxpixel)

Bashar arrived in Germany in October 2015, at the height of the migrant influx, along with his parents and five siblings; claiming to be refugees, they turned out to be economic migrants. Bashar’s asylum request was rejected in December 2016. He should have been deported, but after he filed an appeal, German authorities allowed him to stay.

During his three years in Germany, Bashar chalked up an extensive criminal record, including physical assault of law enforcement officers, violent robbery at knifepoint and possession of illegal weapons.

Police said that Bashar was also a suspect in the March 2018 rape of an 11-year-old girl living in the same refugee shelter where he and his family were staying.

Bashar was able to flee Germany under a false identity because of bureaucratic incompetence: federal border police failed to check if the name on his plane ticket matched the name on his identity papers.

Bashar was arrested in northern Iraq on June 8 and was extradited to Germany a day later. He is currently being held at a correctional facility in Wiesbaden.

Susanna’s murder was the fourth German teenager to be murdered by illegal migrants during the past 18 months.

  • October 16, 2016. Maria Ladenburger, a 19-year-old medical student from Freiburg, was raped and murdered after returning home from a party hosted by her school’s medical faculty. Her attacker was Hussein Khavari, who entered Germany in November 2015 without identification papers. He claimed to have been born in Afghanistan in November 1999. Because of his alleged age (16), he was granted asylum as an underage unaccompanied migrant and placed with a foster family.

    After Khavari was arrested as a suspect in the Ladenburger case, the newsmagazine Stern reported that in February 2014, Khavari had been sentenced to ten years in prison for attempted murder for pushing a 20-year-old woman over a cliff on the Greek island of Corfu. The woman survived the attack and Khavari was released after serving 18 months in prison, based on an amnesty for juvenile offenders. He then migrated to Germany.

    During his trial in Greece, Khavari told the court that he had been born in Iran in January 1996 and had arrived in Europe in January 2013.

    During his trial in Germany, Khavari confessed to raping and killing Ladenburger. It emerged that Khavari was born in Iran on January 29, 1984 and that at the time he killed Ladenburger, he was actually 32. On March 22, 2018, Khavari was sentenced to life in prison for rape and murder, but according to German law, he may apply for parole after serving 15 years.

  • December 27, 2017. Mia Valentin, a 15-year-old girl from Kandel, a small town in the federal state of Rhineland-Palatinate, near the German border with France, was stabbed to death at a local drugstore. Her attacker was Abdul Mobin, a failed Afghan asylum seeker who claimed to be 15 years old.

    Valentin and her attacker had been in a relationship for several months, but after she ended it in early December 2017, Mobin began to threaten her. On December 15, the girl’s parents filed a formal complaint to police. Police visited Mobin on December 17, and again on the morning of December 27. Later that day, Mobin followed Valentin into the drugstore and stabbed her with a kitchen knife he had purchased at the same store. The girl died a short time later.

    Mobin had arrived in Germany in April 2016 and initially resided at a refugee shelter in Frankfurt. He was later transferred to a refugee shelter in Germersheim, a small town in the federal state of Rhineland-Palatinate, and then to a youth facility in nearby Neustadt. His asylum claim was rejected in February 2017, but he was not deported. Mobin, who was known to police after he punched a student at Valentin’s school, is being held in custody while German authorities try to determine his true age.

  • March 12, 2018. Mireille Bold, a 17-year-old girl from Flensburg, was stabbed to death by Ahmad Gulbhar, an 18-year-old asylum seeker from Afghanistan. He allegedly became enraged and killed her after she refused to wear a headscarf convert to Islam. Gulbhar had arrived in Germany in 2015 as an underage unaccompanied migrant. His asylum application was rejected but he was never deported.

    Bold, who lived in the same building as her attacker, had called police for help at least once before she was killed. A good friend of Bold’s family told the newspaper Bild:

    “Ahmad was a jealous rooster who always wanted to control her. They have been in a relationship since January 2016, but there were constant rows. He insisted that she convert to Islam and always wear a headscarf.

    “She wasn’t sure. Whenever she went scarfless there was trouble. Mireille told me that he fled alone from Afghanistan and had a great longing for his family. He was supposed to have a job in a civil engineering company. Once when she met with him he called her every two minutes on her phone demanding to know what was happening.”

    The attacker is being held in pre-trial detention.

As with the deaths of the other teenagers, Susanna’s murder prompted the usual barrage of political posturing and feigned outrages from German politicians and media.

The level of public outrage over Susanna’s case, however, suggests that Germany may be reaching a tipping point: the German government is finally being held to account for its role in the migrant rape crisis.

“The government should beg for forgiveness from Susanna’s parents,” said the mass circulation Bild. “The only thing that is worse than the murder of a child is the murder of a child by a criminal who should not have been in our country.”

The leader of the Free Democrats (FDP), Christian Lindner, said that the crime raises many questions: “Why are rejected asylum seekers not deported more consistently? Why could the perpetrator and his family flee under a false identity?”

“This is typical of our German security agencies,” FDP politician Alexander Graf Lambsdorff said. “There are simply too many gaps in this system. This has been terribly upsetting for many years.”

SPD manager Carsten Schneider said what had to be quickly clarified was “how the suspect was able to escape, and how he can be brought to court in Germany as quickly as possible.”

“The Federal Interior Minister must ensure that the existing control mechanisms are also used during entry and exit,” said Burkhard Lischka, an SPD spokesman. “With such questionable papers and in view of the destination, the Federal Police could have determined with a simple fingerprint comparison that a criminal is on the run.”

“The cruel murder of Susanna fills me with great sadness and anger,” saidEckhardt Rehberg of the CDU. “As a politician responsible for the budget, I say…the entire asylum process needs to be fundamentally reshaped. We will provide the money for that.”

The Alternative for Germany (AfD), the anti-immigration party, called for the resignation of the entire federal government. In a video posted on Twitter, AfD co-leader Alice Weidel said:

“Susanna is dead. Maria from Freiburg; Mia from Kandel; Mireille from Flensburg; and now Susanna from Mainz….

“Susanna’s death is not a blind stroke of fate. Susanna’s death is the result of many years of organized irresponsibility and the scandalous failure of our asylum and immigration policies. Susanna is victim of an out-of-control leftwing multicultural ideology that stops at nothing to impose its sense of moral superiority. Susanna is also another victim of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s hypocritical and selfish welcome policy.

“Legally, Ali Bashar should never have been allowed into Germany. His asylum request was rejected more than two years ago, and he should have been deported. Bashar was known to police for physical assault, attacking police officers, and possessing illegal weapons. In March 2018, he was suspected of raping an 11-year-old girl at a refugee shelter. According to the law, Bashar should have had to leave Germany a long time ago or be arrested.

“An absurd asylum law and a grotesque asylum policy…it is lenient toward asylum cheaters and criminals but ignores the genuine concerns of German citizens.

“Ali Bashar, his parents and five siblings lived here on the taxpayer’s dime, they could not be deported, but after his Ali’s crime, they somehow found the money to flee Germany on falsified documents. No problem in a Germany with open borders.

“On the day of Susanna’s murder, you [Merkel] testified in parliament that you have handled the migrant crisis responsibly. Do you dare to repeat that claim to Susanna’s parents? Well, no. Your hard-heartedness and self-righteousness means you feel you are above offering the victims of your policies a personal word. This is unacceptable to us citizens. Will you finally accept responsibility, Mrs. Merkel? You and your entire cabinet should resign to make possible another asylum policy so that the parents in this country no longer need to fear for the safety of their children.”

The newsmagazine Stern concluded:

“The emotional reactions to Susanna’s case illustrate how Germany has changed. Already in the summer of the refugee crisis, when hundreds of thousands of people came into the country, there were warnings that the mood in the population could tip….

“The case of Susanna awakens the image of a loss of control, an overstretched state that no longer has a grip on asylum policy — especially in a society that loves law and order. There are now repeated demands for stricter laws. The current scandal over maladministration at the Federal Office of Migration and Refugees [immigration officials accepted cash bribes in exchange for granting asylum to more than 1,200 migrants] seems to emphasize the impression of a failure of the state.”

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.

The Smear Campaign against Ronald Mortensen

(Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

National Review, by Hans A. von Spakovsky and Ana Quintana, June 2, 2018:

The Trump administration’s pick for a refugee-resettlement post is highly qualified but has met with bad-faith criticism.

Last week the White House announced it will nominate Ronald Mortensen to head the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM). With decades of experience in humanitarian assistance, diplomacy, and management, Mortensen is well qualified for the job. Yet the Left is rushing to its battle stations to try and stop his confirmation.

The State Department describes PRM’s mission this way: “to provide protection, ease suffering, and resolve the plight of persecuted and uprooted people around the world on behalf of the American people.” A look at Mortensen’s career makes clear he’s an ideal candidate to run this arm of America’s engagement with the world.

A 20-year veteran of the Foreign Service, Mortensen has labored to ease suffering on four continents. Working with the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance in the U.S. Agency for International Development, he was sent to Haiti after the earthquake and went to west Africa to help fight the Ebola outbreak. He flew to Iraq in the immediate aftermath of the invasion in 2003 and has led disaster-assistance response teams there five times. Mortensen also has served in Pakistan, Ethiopia, Sudan, and the Congo.

As he noted to a reporter, “saving lives and alleviating human suffering — what better job can there be?”

But overseeing the $3 billion–plus budget of PRM isn’t just a matter of humanitarianism. Mortensen — with a master’s degree in public administration and a Ph.D. in political science — also has what it takes to captain this ship. In addition to gaining extensive management experience while working for the government, Mortensen was director of human resources and international entry for the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics, an especially complex management puzzle given the stringent new visa security procedures that were set up after 9/11.

So where’s the controversy? Why are activists on the left so outraged?

As its name suggests, PRM manages refugee issues — both helping those abroad and resettling some in the U.S. What’s driving the Left’s smear campaign is a policy disagreement over the balance between these two approaches. The Trump administration correctly believes it is more effective to use the limited taxpayer funds available to help the greatest number of people, which means focusing on assistance overseas rather than the very costly process of resettling a relative handful of refugees in hard-pressed American communities.

The administration’s critics, however, want ever-higher levels of refugee arrivals. Many refugee-advocacy groups see the admission of more and more refugees as a kind of moral litmus test, despite the fact that each dollar spent on resettling a refugee in the U.S. could help care for twelve refugees abroad.

What should be a civil policy disagreement has turned into a smear campaign against Mortensen. The ACLU has falsely called him an “anti-immigrant zealot.” The Anti-Defamation League has defamed him with an erroneous claim that his supposedly “extreme anti-immigrant rhetoric” is “disqualifying.” And the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which is “infamous for lumping mainstream conservative nonprofits alongside legitimate hate groups,” according to the Capital Research Center, has slammed Mortensen because of his connection to the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a mainstream think tank the SPLC perversely labels a “hate group.”

What makes this last smear especially implausible is that Mortensen, in his work as a fellow at CIS, has written only on issues related to illegal immigration, not refugees. But this distinction is lost on those whose only recommendation on immigration and refugee resettlement is “More!” — even if it means helping fewer people.

At their core, U.S. immigration and refugee programs must serve U.S. interests, support our allies, and help those in greatest need. That cannot happen without serious reforms to the status quo.

Mortensen has spent years away from home delivering food to the hungry, medicine to the sick, clothes to the shivering, and housing to the homeless. He knows how to help the largest number of refugees with the funds entrusted to him by the American taxpayer. He is exactly what this agency needs, and Americans will be proud of his service when he is confirmed.

Hans A. von Spakovsky is a senior legal fellow, and Ana Quintana a senior policy analyst, at the Heritage Foundation.

What’s on the Mind of a Muslim ‘Refugee’?

MEF, by Burak Bekdil
BESA Center Perspectives
September 10, 2017

Originally published under the title “What’s on a Muslim Refugee’s Mind?”

The autumn of 2015 was unusual in almost every way on the north Aegean Greek island of Lesbos from which I am writing. There were tens of thousands of illegal migrants on the island, the native population of which was scarcely 100,000. New refugees arrived every day by the thousands.[1]

One evening, the blue-grey sky grumbled shortly after sunset. The thick clouds blackened and rain poured down over the city with a roar. As I ran across the slippery pavement into a friend’s bar, I heard a group of five poor souls speaking Persian with a Turkic accent and running amok, seeking shelter under the eaves of a building.

A quarter of an hour later I found them in front of my friend’s bar, totally soaked. I went out and asked them if they spoke English; they shook their heads. I asked them in Turkish if they spoke Turkish. With glittering eyes, three of them cheerfully said, “Evet!” [“Yes” in Turkish]. I told them they could come into the bar if they liked. They hesitated but politely declined. I asked if they needed food, water, or cigarettes.

The one with the most fluent Turkish stepped forward. He drew a pack of banknotes from his pocket and said, “If you really want to help, find us a hotel. The best, if possible. We have cash. Money is no problem. Find us a hotel and we’ll pay you a commission.” He explained that all the “damn” hotels on the island were full [of refugees] and they needed rooms.

I apologized and disappeared into the bar.

Why do millions of Muslims risk everything to reach a civilization they blame for all the world’s evils?

Nearly two years later, on a beautiful and cool summer evening, I met A. at a bar on the same island. A., a Syrian refugee, often spends his evenings bar-hopping with his Western friends. Those friends are mostly romantic European social workers who, I observed several times, sport t-shirts, bags, and laptops festooned with the Palestinian flag. They are on the island to help the unfortunate Muslim refugees who are fleeing war in their native countries.

“I’ll tell you strictly Muslim-to-Muslim,” A. said in good English after having poured down a few shots of whiskey. “These (European social workers) are funny guys. And they’re not just funny. They’re also silly. I don’t know why on earth they are in love with a Muslim cause that even some of us Muslims despise.”

Last year, three Afghans stopped in front of my house on the same island and asked for drinking water. I gave them three bottles and asked if they needed anything else. Coffee? They accepted and sat down in the garden chairs.

Over coffee, they said they were glad to be hosted “not by an infidel on this infidel island” but by a Muslim. The young Afghan who was dressed like a dancer from a cheap hip-hop clip on MTV said, “One day we good Muslims will conquer their infidel lands.” I asked why he was receiving “infidel” money for living. “It’s just halal,” he answered. “They [‘infidels’] are too easy to fool.”

M., another fluently English-speaking Syrian, gave me a long lecture on the wonderful governance of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. “Turkey is the best country in the world!” M. said. ” Erdoğan is the leader of the ummah.” I asked why he had risked his life to cross illegally from the “best country in the world” to the “poor, infidel lands.” “I want to go to Europe to increase the Muslim population there,” he said. “I want to make a Muslim family there. I want to have plenty of children.” I reminded him that Greece, too, is a European country. No it’s not, he answered.

Almost all illegal migrants in Greece want to get to Germany, where they will be the best paid.

Almost all the illegal migrants on that and other Greek islands want to get to Germany, where they have heard from friends and relatives that they will be the best paid for being “poor” refugees. The cliché “the-poor-souls-are-fleeing-war-in-their-native-country” is becoming less and less convincing every day. True, most Syrians fled to Turkey after the start of civil war in their country. But why did they then risk their lives to squeeze into 12-man rubber boats with 40-50 other people, including children and the elderly? Because of war in Turkey?

No. Despite political instability and insecurity for all, there is technically no war in Turkey. It is a Muslim country whose mostly Muslim migrants want to leave it as soon as possible for non-Muslim Europe.

They reach the shores of the Greek islands, which are so beautiful that people from across the world fly there for their holidays. But the islands are not good enough. They want to go to Athens. Why? Because there is war on the Greek islands? No. It’s because Athens is the start of the exit route to the Balkans.

Apply the same logic to Serbia, Hungary, and Austria. Like Greece, none of those countries will be good enough for the refugees. Why not? Because there is war in Serbia or Hungary or Austria? Or because “my cousin tells me Germans pay the best?”

Turkey’s leaders often threaten Europe that they will “open the gates” and flood Europe with millions of refugees. They should ask themselves instead why those Muslim refugees are so eager to leave the “new Turkish empire” if given the chance. Why would they choose not to live a comfortable life in a powerful and peaceful Muslim country and instead flock to the “infidel” west?

Erdoğan blames the West for the tragedy. He has criticized the West for having taken only 250,000 Syrian refugees. In 2016, then Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said the United Nations Security Council’s five permanent members (the US, Russia, Britain, France, and China), should pay the price, not Syria’s [Muslim] neighbors.

It is ironic that millions of Muslims are trying, through dangerous means, to reach the borders of a civilization they have historically blamed for all the world’s evils, including those of their own countries. The “romantic” West does not question why millions of West-hating Muslims are heading in their direction. Or is it “Islamophobic” to point out that there is no war in Greece, Serbia, Hungary, or Austria?

Burak Bekdil is an Ankara-based political analyst and a fellow at the Middle East Forum.

[1] By the end of July 2017, the number of refugees and migrants in Greece waiting to be granted asylum or deported had fallen to 62,407. The five Aegean islands (Lesvos, Chios, Samos, Kos and Leros) are presently home to 15,222 asylum-seekers and migrants.

***

A year ago, screaming headlines spoke of an immigration crisis in Europe, caused by refugees fleeing the Middle East. You may not have heard much lately, about what was called the refugee crisis of 2016. Here’s a new headline: it hasn’t gone away. In fact, in some respects, it may be getting worse. Scott Thuman went to France, to examine the growing worry, over this new wave of refugees.