U.S. Set to Take Refugees Rejected by Australia

Patriot News Daily ^ | 12/2/2016 | Staff

[HomerBohn]

Republicans in the House and Senate sent a letter to Obama administration officials this week, demanding more details about nearly 2,500 refugees the U.S. is taking from Australian. The refugees, who originate from some of the world’s most dangerous countries, have apparently been rejected by the Australian government. Now, lawmakers want to know why these refugees – too dangerous for Papua New Guinea and Nauru – are perfectly welcome inside the United States.

From Fox News:

In a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry, key lawmakers Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., complained about the lack of transparency.

“This situation is concerning for many reasons,” read the letter, charging that “your departments negotiated an international agreement regarding refugees without consulting or notifying Congress.”

The State Department has classified details on the deal, but defended the move in a statement. The United States is proud of its long history as the largest refugee resettlement country in the world,” the department said. “As the President has announced, our refugee resettlement program has grown substantially in the last year.

“The United States has agreed to consider referrals from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) of refugees now residing in Nauru and Papua New Guinea. These refugees are of special interest to UNHCR and we are engaged on a humanitarian basis, as we are in other parts of the world.”

There’s no concrete reason to believe the refugees have any relationship to terrorism, but they are mostly from countries known for Islamic extremism. According to Fox News, U.S. officials confirmed that the refugees were from Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan, Somalia, and Sri Lanka. Others are considered “stateless.”

Just who you want moving in next door, eh?

But hey, most of them are probably just fine. Hell, maybe all of them except one or two. Why not roll the dice…

[Gay State Conservative]

Australia is a damn fine country populated by damn fine people.Over the decades she has paid more than her fair share to ensure the freedom,stability and prosperity Western countries enjoy today.As a result she has the right to expect her allies,including us,to help her out when she's in a tight spot.

The fact that it's Obama doing the accepting is reason for suspicion,at least partially because he has,for his entire life,shown utter,open contempt for our traditional allies (Canada,Britain,Australia,Israel,etc).I,for one,would want the details as to why Australian officials rejected them in the first place.I'd be willing to bet they had a good reason.

Perhaps these people could reasonably be rejected by any sane,civilized country.

[Rome2000]

Senator Joe McCarthy Suspected Communists Hearings -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maLIXQLxvvA

We need to destroy the enemy within.

[Freedom56v2]

“...it is going to be an on-going process to find and weed out all the dangerous refugees and immigrants that Obama has allowed in.”

---

Wow! Quite a list! :(

I had thought about including the word “difficult,” and now I wish I had.

“It is going to be an on-going difficult process to find and weed out all the dangerous refugees and immigrants that Obama has allowed in.”

[JohnBrowdie]

afraid there’s not much we can do about it until we control the executive branch once again.

[JohnBrowdie]

that’s if they don’t disappear.

[naturalman1975]

I,for one,would want the details as to why Australian officials rejected them in the first place.I'd be willing to bet they had a good reason.

Because, for the moment, so much is being kept confidential, it's impossible to know for absolute certain, but I actually think it's quite likely that these people are actually quite 'safe' in terms of allowing immigration.

Australia currently has an ironclad policy that if you attempt to come here illegally by boat, you will never be settled in Australia under any circumstances. There are very good reasons for this policy - the main one being it's the only approach that really prevents people trying to get into the country this way - but it does create one particular dilemma - what to do with people who attempted to come here by boat, who after off shore processing, are actually assessed as genuine refugees. We cannot allow these people into Australia without weakening our policy in a way that will reopen the floodgates of attempted illegal entry. But we do have an obligation under international law, and many would argue a moral obligation to help these genuine refugees who cannot safely be returned home, to find a place of safety.

For that reason, Australia has adopted a policy in such cases, of seeking to resettle such people in a third nation that has decided itself to have accepted genuine refugees. Most first world nations choose to accept a certain number of genuine refugees - including the United States.

That is what is going on here - Australia has asked the United States to include in its already determined quota of genuine refugees it is willing to accept from overseas, some of the people currently held in detention by Australia. If you don't take them from us, you're going to take them from somewhere - you've already decided that with your quota (which may be too high in some people's opinion, but that is a separate issue).

Now, here's the thing. The people Australia is asking the US to accept have already been through Australia's very tough processing system. They should have been assessed as (1) genuine refugees, (2) not likely to be dangerous, and (3) healthy. In all honesty, if you are going to accept refugees from overseas, these are probably the best ones you are going to get. And the US still has every right to assess them as well again - so another entire layer of assessment - and accept or reject every single one of them individually.

Viewed objectively, these are likely among the safest people who will ever be admitted to the United States as refugees.

The only reason they have been rejected from coming to Australia is the fact that they made the attempt by boat, and we do not make any exceptions on that rule.

The rules apply to everyone. There are no exceptions. If you get on a boat without a visa, you will not end up in Australia.

Now, the lack of transparency that we're seeing over this means I think Americans have every right to be concerned. And America is under no obligation to take these people, so if Americans don't want to, I can understand that as well. But I just think it's important that the facts are understood.

At the moment, a lot of people seem to be assuming these people are likely to be specifically dangerous - in actual fact, it's much more likely these people are safe. And I actually think that's a large part of the reason that the Obama administration has agreed to the deal. Because if you're going to take a couple of thousand anyway, do you want people who've been screened by a first world nation over a number of years with decent police and intelligence capabilities and health standards, or people taken out of UNHCR camps in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. And remember, you can still screen every single one of them again - and I hope would.

[Mr Apple]

...that's if they don't disappear
...that's if they don't disappear
...that's if they don't disappear

******
******

130,000 refugees vanished after being registered in Germany – media report
Published time: 26 Feb, 2016

https://www.rt.com/news/333684-germany-refugees-disappear-report/

******

THOUSANDS OF MUSLIM MIGRANTS 'DISAPPEAR' FROM CAMPS
Published: 10/30/2015

http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/thousands-of-muslim-migrants-disappear-from-camps/

******

15K Muslim Refugees ‘Missing’ From Sweden, Germany As Deportation Of Criminals Begins
Published On: Tue, Dec 1st, 2015

http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/15k-muslim-refugees-missing-from-sweden-germany-as-deportation-of-criminals-begins-99655

******

Uh-Oh… 14,000 Illegal Immigrants in Sweden DISAPPEAR WITHOUT A TRACE
Jim Hoft Nov 30th, 2015

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/11/uh-oh-14000-illegal-immigrants-in-sweden-disappear-without-a-trace/

******

Hundreds of refugees disappear in Germany
Published: 26 Oct 2015

http://www.thelocal.de/20151026/hundreds-of-refugees-disappearing-from-centres

******

Europe Refugee Crisis: 1,000 Children Reported Missing From Swedish Town
BY JACKIE SALO 10/15/15

"We don't know where they are. ... We don't have the possibility to stop them leaving. We can't wait by their beds day and night," Agneta Sjölund, director of Trelleborg Municipality, told The Local.

http://www.ibtimes.com/europe-refugee-crisis-1000-children-reported-missing-swedish-town-2143290

******

Teen's murder-rape arrest reignites refugee debate
Published: 05 Dec 2016

The German government pleaded for calm on Monday after the arrest of a teenage Afghan asylum seeker for the alleged rape and murder of a German student triggered fresh criticism of the country's liberal refugee policy.

http://www.thelocal.de/20161205/afghans-murder-rape-arrest-reignites-germany-refugee-debate

[Mr Apple]

At the moment, a lot of people seem to be assuming these people are likely to be specifically dangerous - in actual fact, it's much more likely these people are safe.>

Oh Yeah.......Right. Sure thing.

[Mr Apple]

And remember, you can still screen every single one of them again -

After reading and comprehending my post # 47, can we 'screen every single one of them again' - - if they have 'vanished'? Huh.
It's "Waldo .........Find the Muslim"

:(

[Eleutheria5]

The State Department has classified details on the deal, but defended the move in a statement. The United States is proud of its long history as the largest refugee resettlement country in the world,” the department said. “As the President has announced, our refugee resettlement program has grown substantially in the last year.

Yup. And I bob for french fries in my deep fryer, too. I’m real proud of that.

[Mr Apple]

Germany has welcomed an estimated 1.1 million refugees in 2015, mostly from the Middle East and Northern Africa, of which about a half are either without official documents or have disappeared.

[Gay State Conservative]

Just FYI,Mr Apple (in case you're unaware),"naturalman" is a longtime Aussie Freeper who has a very deep understanding of Western culture in general,and Australian politics in particular.When he speaks of Australia he's someone from whom we Yanks can learn much.

Just sayin'...

[naturalman1975]

Yes, you can screen every one of these people again - the people who are the subject of this specific discussion. They have not vanished. They are sitting in camps available for inspection by American authorities.

I’m not talking about all refugees. I’m talking about the specific people who are the subject of the article posted. They have been through extensive screening by Australia, and America is absolutely free to put them through screening again - and certainly should.

[Freedom56v2]

Wow!

You know, just wondering but I don’t think FR has an immigration/refugee ping list, but maybe we should. We had an H-1B Visa ping last year which covered some issues, but nothing encompassing the entire topic.

[Mr Apple]

...and America is absolutely free to put them through screening again

Yes or No '75 - - can you Guarantee Us that none of these refugees will disappear once they've been scattered to the winds? These islamic towel head scumbags are Not going to be held in camps for years. Including if they arrive here in our USA. Yes or No only. Can you guarantee us that none of these sneaky islamic towel heads will disappear as they have and are doing throughout Germany and Sweden? Don't reply any other way. Yes or No only.

[WVNan]

It’s probably going to be up to the American people to keep track of all refuges. As individuals we should be able to keep up with those who are settled near us and make a point to get information on them and keep records on their movements. Freepers are well situated to keep a shared archive on those we learn about in or near our own communities. We should all do everything we can to keep them from isolating themselves. Do that by “helping” them so you can get names, number of family members etc. We are way too dependent on the local “government” to keep “problem” neighbors in line. Become “nosy” neighbors, even in the cities. This is a large country. We need lots of eyes.

[Whenifhow]

PING!!!

Article and comments, esp #32, #38, #40. #47

Thanks, HomerBohn

[naturalman1975]

No.

But that has little to do with what I've been writing about. I have been explicitly talking about the situation as it is now not at some future date. The question was asked as to why Australia has rejected these people - that's the question I was answering. And the answer is not because they are considered dangerous, but because whether they are dangerous or not is irrelevant to Australia's decision in this situation. They could be Christian Saints and they'd be refused because it is the current policy of the Australian government that no person who attempts to come to Australia by boat without a visa will ever, under any circumstances, be allowed to settle in Australia. No exceptions. So Australia's refusal to accept these people does not indicate they are dangerous. In fact, the decision that they are valid refugees with a valid claim to asylum suggests they are not considered dangerous after extensive screening by Australian authorities.

Australia's policy of not accepting illegal boat arrivals is partly security related, but it's also in large part humanitarian. The sea crossing between Indonesia and Australia is dangerous in a small boat and at times when Australia has not had this policy in place and asylum seekers have decided to take the risk to cross in large numbers, hundreds are known to have drowned in the attempt. Making it clear to these people that there is no point in taking that risk because it will never pay off with entry to Australia saves lives.

You seem to me to be concerned about what might happen in the future, and that's a perfectly valid concern and I agree that once these people are in the United States, monitoring any of them who chose not to be monitored could be extremely difficult, but it's not what I was talking about in my post at #46. It is a simple fact that at the moment, we know where these people are, and the United States is welcome to put any of them through any screening it chooses before deciding whether or not to let them into the United States. And that is what I was talking about. Not something in the future, but the situation as it is now.

Please note - I am not, for a moment, saying that the US should take these people. If I was an American, I'd want my government to refuse them - why take on somebody else's problem? Whether these people are dangerous or not, they are in no way, shape, or form, the responsibility of the United States. But having said that, I think people should understand the facts and what is going on, and I am seeing a lot of misunderstandings about this in the US media when the issue is being discussed, in particular on the question of why Australia won't accept these people. And that is really very simple.

This policy is critical to Australia's security and to keeping innocent people alive. Confusion about it undermines both those things.

[cardinal4]

Republicans in the House and Senate sent a letter to Obama administration officials this week

That'll show'em!

Jeez, no wonder Hussein walked all over congress..

[LucyT]

U.S. Set to Take Refugees Rejected by Australia

Obama continues to import 'hell on earth' for America!

Article and comments, see graphic at # 58.