Category Archives: Department of Homeland Security

DOJ Considering Parents vs. School Boards as Terrorists

Posted on by

The National School Boards Association wrote a 6 page letter to President Biden. The full letter is here. In part:

As these threats and acts of violence have become more prevalent – during public
school board meetings, via documented threats transmitted through the U.S. Postal Service, through
social media and other online platforms, and around personal properties – NSBA respectfully asks
that a joint collaboration among federal law enforcement agencies, state and local law enforcement,
and with public school officials be undertaken to focus on these threats. NSBA specifically solicits
the expertise and resources of the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Secret Service, and its National Threat Assessment
Center regarding the level of risk to public schoolchildren, educators, board members, and
facilities/campuses. We also request the assistance of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to intervene
against threatening letters and cyberbullying attacks that have been transmitted to students, school
board members, district administrators, and other educators.

As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the
classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and
hate crimes. As such, NSBA requests a joint expedited review by the U.S. Departments of Justice,
Education, and Homeland Security, along with the appropriate training, coordination,
investigations, and enforcement mechanisms from the FBI, including any technical assistance
necessary from, and state and local coordination with, its National Security Branch and
Counterterrorism Division, as well as any other federal agency with relevant jurisdictional authority
and oversight. Additionally, NSBA requests that such review examine appropriate enforceable
actions against these crimes and acts of violence under the Gun–Free School Zones Act, the
PATRIOT Act in regards to domestic terrorism, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate
Crimes Prevention Act, the Violent Interference with Federally Protected Rights statute, the
Conspiracy Against Rights statute, an Executive Order to enforce all applicable federal laws for the(…)

UPDATE: Cape school board meeting ends in protest | Cape Gazette

In another part of the letter:

These threats or actual acts of violence against our school districts are impacting the delivery of
educational services to students and families, as many districts receive federal funds and subsidies
for services to millions of students with disabilities, health screenings and supplemental supports for
disadvantaged students, child nutrition, broadband connectivity, educator development, school
safety activities, career and technical education, and more. School board meetings have been
disrupted in California, Florida, Georgia, and other states because of local directives for mask
coverings to protect students and educators from COVID–19.

An individual was arrested in Illinois for aggravated battery and disorderly conduct during a school
board meeting. During two separate school board meetings in Michigan9, an individual yelled a
Nazi salute in protest to masking requirements, and another individual prompted the board to call
a recess because of opposition to critical race theory.

Virginia's Loudoun County School Board silences public comment after raucous meeting, 2 men arrested | Fox News

Who do you think will win in this battle? Just a few days ago in a debate of candidates for the governors race in Virginia, Terry McAuliffe –>

Terry McAuliffe and Glenn Youngkin sparred during the second and final debate of Virginia’s governor’s race on Tuesday, but it was one comment on schools by McAuliffe, the Democratic candidate, that drew the ire of conservatives. 

“I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach,” McAuliffe, who previously served as governor of Virginia from 2014 to 2018, said during the debate in Alexandria, Virginia.

McAuliffe made the remarks in response to Youngkin, the Republican candidate, who argued that parents should be more involved in the decisions of local school districts. Conservative social media responded. 

Just how long before the public school systems across the country collapse and homeowners challenge in court their property tax dollars that pay for the public school systems and teachers? The Biden administration is fully devoted to unions and will continue to side with the teacher’s unions as has already been proven with regard to financial bailouts and masks mandates.

Take caution parents, this is a tailspin that has no end until the parents declare an end to the entire corrupt system.

 

Useful Details/Laws about the Migrant Chaos at the Southern Border

Posted on by

As a primer:

America’s Founders were concerned about invasion. It was mentioned it four times in the Constitution, though the term was never explicitly defined.

Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 15: The Congress shall have the Power (to) provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 3: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Article IV, Section 4, Paragraph 1: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestics Violence.

So, as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Mayorkas admits at least 13,000 Haitians were admitted into the United States to clear Del Rio, no one can deny this is an invasion. Further, that number only refers to those under that bridge in Del Rio, it does not include the 1.2 million that already passed into the United States or the unknown number of ‘gotaways’. Miles and miles of other parts of the Southern border goes unprotected or managed due to the overwhelming volume.

In June of 2021, Congressman Jody Arrington (R-TX) introduced legislation that further explains the lawlessness that Congress must address.

H.J.Res.50 – Recognizing that Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution explicitly reserves to the States the sovereign power to repel an invasion and defend their citizenry from the overwhelming and “imminent danger” posed by paramilitary, narco-terrorist cartels who have seized control of our southern border.

Read the proposed legislation here. 

Of course under Speaker Nancy Pelosi there will be no movement to this legislation or others in the pipeline.

Even more crazy is the fact that the Haitians were already given residency status in several countries in Latin America going back to as far as 2010, directly after the earthquake.

After the earthquake of 2010, thousands of Haitians began migration to the country, in hopes of finding a new life. According to Atlanta Blackstar, the United Nations reported “an unprecedented number of people displaced from their homes—one in 113 people in the world—migration and asylum has once again come under the spotlight.”

In 2015, the Brazilian government granted residency to almost 44, 000 Haitians. source

Haitians Flee To Brazil To Escape Getty Images

In part from an NBC affiliate: Most of the Haitians already had refugee status in Chile or Brazil but were not seeking the same from Mexico, according to Mexico’s foreign relations secretary, Marcelo Ebrard. “What they are asking for is to be allowed to pass freely through Mexico to the United States,” Ebrard said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas issued a stark warning during a news conference Monday. “If you come to the United States illegally, you will be returned, your journey will not succeed, and you will be endangering your life and your family’s life,” he said. The DHS says some who are being released are given legal documents summoning them to a court date.

“Individuals who are not immediately repatriated are either placed in Alternatives to Detention, detained in an ICE facility, or released with a legal document (either a Notice to Appear in court or a notice to report to an ICE office for further immigration processing),” DHS spokesman Eduardo Maia Silva told Sinclair Broadcast Group in an emailed statement. (this obviously has turned out to be a lie)

 

 

.

“The reason Haitian migrants discard their Chilean and Brazilian ID cards over here on the Mex side is to obscure from asylum reviewers that they were already safely and prosperously situated for years and years before coming for the American upgrades,” explained Bensman.

Fox News journalist Bill Melugin also published photographs of documents discarded by the migrants, and among the findings, he discovered that some of them had already been processed by the United States.

 

It should be recalled that according to the Daily Mail, a recent report by the DHS Office of Inspector General found that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) does not have the resources to assess the health of migrants entering its custody and relies on public health systems in surrounding cities to do so.

“Without stronger COVID-19 prevention measures in place, DHS is putting its workforce, support staff, communities, and migrants at greater risk of contracting the virus,” wrote the DHS Office of Inspector General. source

Now back to that pesky Constitution…right? Not for anyone part of the Biden administration.

Was it Eco-Health, NIH or Wuhan and the Money that Killed so Many?

Posted on by

The US-based, non-profit research group EcoHealth Alliance in 2014 received a US$3.1 million, five-year NIH grant to understand the risk of a novel bat virus spilling into humans in China, as had happened in the Sars outbreak in 2002.

“It would have been irresponsible of us if we did not investigate the bat viruses and the serology to see who might have been infected in China,” Fauci, whose institute was responsible for the grant, testified at a congressional hearing in May.

Research was undertaken in partnership with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, with a budget of between US$120,000 and US$150,000 a year under the grant, according to documents released by The Intercept.

Part of the work included exploring whether newly discovered bat viruses had the potential to infect people, and it is this aspect of the research which has come under scrutiny.

Wei Jingsheng, in a new report about his upcoming book called “What happened in Wuhan,” stated that he first heard about the Coronavirus at the World Military Games in Wuhan in October 2019. source

Chinese defector Wei Jingsheng tried to warn US officials.

source

Alerted by the news, he returned to the US and notified the CIA and FBI about what he had heard. The Agencies already knew him because he defected to the United States back in 1997 after leaving the Chinese communist party. Mr. Jingsheng said that he also alerted US politicians with connections to Trump and then alerted the Chinese human rights activist Dimon Liu.

Mr. Wei said that he found out more about the virus from one of his contacts in Beijing. He also noted that through Chinese activist Dimon Liu he spoke to politicians in the house about the dangers of the outbreak and that he also expressed his concerns to people in the Trump white house in 2019.
Wei said he would not reveal what politicians with ties to Trump he spoke with but states that the politicians could have reached the President immediately.

Chinese Human rights activist Demon Liu revealed that Mr. Lei told her about the virus at a dinner with her husband, a retired CIA agent, on November 22, 2019.
Liu said in a statement, “I couldn’t quite believe what he was saying,” Liu went on to say. “At that time, I had thought that the Coronavirus could not be worse than SARS. And SARS, as we knew from experience, was not that contagious, and it could be contained. I thought at the time that was the case. Okay, there was an outbreak, but the authorities and the advance of medical sciences would be able to contain the spread of it.”
Liu states that she wanted to pass the information that Mr. Wei gave her to Trump’s deputy National security advisor Matt Pottinger but decided against it because, as she puts it – “I didn’t send it to him because so many things were so incredulous,” she said. “I wrote it, but I didn’t send it because I decided it was better if Wei talks directly to Matt Pottinger.”

China hits back at Wuhan lab leak 'conspiracy' after Biden ...

***

KEY POINTS

  •  27 scientist published a letter in The Lancet last March denouncing lab-leak theories.
  • 26 of the 27 scientists have ties to Wuhan Institute funders or researchers.
  • Lead scientist says letter was written for “our collaborators” in China for a “show of support.”

In March of last year, 27 scientists wrote a letter to medical journal The Lancet denouncing claims that COVID-19 could have originated in a lab. It’s now been revealed that 26 of those 27 scientists have ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology – that’s what we call a conflict of interest.

In The Lancet letter, the scientists stated, “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin.” But, according to the Daily Mail, “The orchestrator of the letter, British zoologist Peter Daszak, [had] a conflict of interest through him being president of the US-based EcoHealth Alliance, which has funded research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”

Additionally, the Telegraph is reporting that a February 8th email released under an FOIA request reveals Mr. Daszak wrote The Lancet letter after being asked by “our collaborators” in China for a “show of support.”

That tanks Mr. Daszak’s credibility – and the other scientists don’t fare much better.

“Other signatories…include Prof Kanta Subbarao, who spoke at a conference in Wuhan – part organised by the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Dr John Mackenzie, of Curtin University of Technology in Australia, [also] put his name to the letter, but failed to mention he was still listed as a committee member of the Scientific Advisory Committee of Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases at the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” the Telegraph reports.

The list goes on and on until…

“Dr Ronald Corley, a microbiology expert from Boston University – has been found to have no links back to funders or researchers at the Wuhan institute,” according to the Daily Mail.

When all is said and done, 26 of the 27 Lancet letter scientists have ties to funders or researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Even members of the scientific community don’t believe Daszak & Co. wrote the article in good faith.

“I was a little perplexed and a little bit upset with five very good scientists, some of whom I know well, who I thought stepped way out beyond what they should have been saying, based on the data available to all of us,” said David Welman, a professor who advises the U.S. government on biological threats and risks.

“These were not scientific papers, they did not present scientific evidence, they did not analyse and support scientific data, they were presenting opinion, they did not belong in scientific journals,” said Richard Ebrigh, chemistry professor at Rutgers University.

Since its publishing, the Lancet letter has been instrumental in slapping down lab-leak “conspiracy theorists.” Now, it won’t be so easy.

$64 Million to Afghanistan Per Biden Admin but Add in $1.2 Billion

Posted on by

The Taliban is swimming in significant assets, with more to come. and China is delighted.he ultimate winner of two decades of war in Afghanistan is likely China. Secretary of State Antony Blinkin confirmed that if the Taliban behaves, the $64 million will be authorized. Further, there is the matter of nations around the world and the pledges they have made in ’emergency funds’ for Afghanistan.

At the first high-level conference on Afghanistan since the Taliban took power a month ago, Western governments, big traditional donors and others announced pledges that went beyond the $606 million that the United Nations was seeking to cover costs through the end of the year for protecting Afghans from looming humanitarian disaster.

U.N. humanitarian chief Martin Griffiths announced at the close of the ministerial meeting that more than $1.2 billion in humanitarian and development aid had been pledged. He said this included the $606 million sought in a “flash appeal” but also a regional response to the Afghan crisis that U.N. refugee chief Filippo Grandi spoke about after arriving in Kabul on a previously unannounced visit.

He wrote on Twitter that he would assess humanitarian needs and the situation of 3.5 million displaced Afghans, including over 500,000 displaced this year alone.

Officials at the U.N. refugee agency, UNHCR, have expressed concerns that more Afghans could take refuge into neighboring Pakistan and Iran, which both already have large numbers of Afghans who fled their country during the past decades of war. sourceTaliban seen with SCAR rifle commonly carried by American ...

GovExe: The aircraft and armored vehicles left behind when U.S. forces withdrew will give China—through their eager partners, the Taliban—a broad window into how the U.S. military builds and uses some of its most important tools of war. Expect the Chinese military to use this windfall to create—and export to client states—a new generation of weapons and tactics tailored to U.S. vulnerabilities, said several experts who spent years building, acquiring, and testing some of the equipment that the Taliban now controls.

To understand how big a potential loss this is for the United States, look beyond the headlines foretelling a Taliban air force. Look instead to the bespoke and relatively primitive pieces of command, control, and communication equipment sitting around in vehicles the United States left on tarmacs and on airfields. These purpose-built items aren’t nearly as invincible to penetration as even your own phone.

“The only reason we aren’t seeing more attacks is because of a veil of secrecy around these systems,” said Josh Lospinoso, CEO of cybersecurity company Shift5. “Once you pierce that veil of secrecy…it massively accelerates the timeline for being able to build cyber weapons” to attack them.

Lospinoso spent ten years in the Army conducting penetration tests against radios, small computers, and other IT gear commonly deployed in Afghanistan.

Take the radios and communications equipment aboard the Afghan Air Force C-130 transport plane captured by the Taliban. The Pentagon has assured that the equipment was disabled. But if any of it remains on the plane an adversary with time and will could pick those apart one by one.

“You now have some or all of the electronic components on that system and it’s a representative laboratory; it’s a playground for building, testing, and iterating on cyber-attacks where maybe the adversary had a really hard time” until he obtained actual copies of the gear, Lospinoso said. “It is the playground for them to develop attacks against similar items.”

Georgianna Shea, who spent five years at MITRE helping the Pentagon research and test new technologies,  said the loss of key equipment to the Taliban “exposes everything we do in the U.S., DOD: our plans of action, how we configure things, how we protect things. It allows them unlimited time and access to go through and find vulnerabilities that we may not be aware of.”

“It’s not just a Humvee. It’s not just a vehicle that gets you from point A to point B. It’s a Humvee that’s full of radios, technologies, crypto systems, things we don’t want our adversaries getting a hold of,” said Shea, now chief technologist at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’s Transformative Innovation Lab.

Of particular concern are the electronic countermeasures gear, or ECMs, used to detect improvised explosive devices.

“Imagine the research and development effort that went into develop those ECM devices that were designed to counter IEDs,” said Peter Christensen, a former director of the U.S. Army’s National Cyber Range. “Now, our adversaries have them. They’re going to have the software and the hardware that goes with that system. But also develop capabilities to defeat or mitigate the effectiveness of those ECM devices.”

Gear that has been “demilitarized” or “rendered inoperable,” as U.S. officials described the planes and vehicles left behind, can still reveal secrets, Shea said.

“In some cases, this equipment was fielded with the assumption we would have gates and guards to protect it. When it was developed, no one thought the Chinese would have it in their cyber lab, dissecting it, pulling it apart.”

Once an attacker has physical control of a device, little can stop her from discovering its vulnerabilities—and there are always vulnerabilities, Shea said.

Under current acquisition practices, most new defense gear is not tested for vulnerabilities until late in the design process. Testers often receive far too little time to test comprehensively. Sometimes they get just two weeks, she said, and yet “they always find something. Always.”

“Regardless of the previous testing that’s been done on compliance, they always find something: always… “They’re very backlogged and don’t have an unending amount of resources,” she said. So you have to schedule development with these testers. There’s not enough resources to test it to the depth and breadth that it should be to understand all of the vulnerabilities.”

Plans to fix newly discovered vulnerabilities “were often inconsistent or inadequate,” Christensen said.

Lospinoso, who spent years conducting such tests for the Army, still performs penetration testing for the U.S. military as a contractor. He says a smart hacker can usually find useful vulnerabilities  in hardware “within hours.”

When such a network attack disables a radio or a truck, troops are generally not trained to do anything about it. They may not even realize that they have been attacked, and may chalk up problems to age or maintenance problems.

“Every time we run an attack against a system, knocked out a subcomponent or have some really devastating effect that could cause loss of an asset—every time, the operator in the cockpit says, ‘We do not have operating procedures for what you just did,’” Lospinoso said.

Little of this is new. In 2017, the Government Accountability Office highlighted many of these concerns in a blistering report.

More than just insight into network vulnerabilities, the abandoned vehicles and gear will help China understand how U.S. forces work with partner militaries, said N. MacDonnell Ulsch, the CEO and chief analyst of Phylax Analytics.

“If you were to take all of the technology that was currently deployed in Afghanistan by the [United States] and you made an assessment of that, you have a point in time and a point in place reference of what the status quo is; what technology is being used, how much it costs, what’s it capable of doing and you realize it’s going to a developing nation,” Ulsch said.

China can use the knowledge to develop their weapons and tactics, but also to give their arms-export sales team an edge, he said. The Taliban have highlighted their nascent partnership with China as perhaps their most important foreign diplomatic effort. China, meanwhile, has already begun giving millions in aid to the new regime.

Whatever vulnerabilities China does discover will likely imperil U.S. troops for years to come, Lospinoso said.

“There is a zero percent chance we will go back and re-engineer” all of the various systems with serious cyber vulnerabilities, he said. “We are stuck with billions and billions in weapon systems that have fundamental flaws.”

 

Less than a Dozen Countries Accepting Afghan Refugees

Posted on by

Primer:

Treaties and other international agreements are written agreements between sovereign states (or between states and international organizations) governed by international law.  The United States enters into more than 200 treaties and other international agreements each year.

The subjects of treaties span the whole spectrum of international relations: peace, trade, defense, territorial boundaries, human rights, law enforcement, environmental matters, and many others. As times change, so do treaties. In 1796, the United States entered into the Treaty with Tripoli to protect American citizens from kidnapping and ransom by pirates in the Mediterranean Sea. In 2001, the United States agreed to a treaty on cybercrime.

Read more about what specific bureaus are doing to support this policy issue:

Office of Treaty Affairs (L/T): The Office of the Assistant Legal Adviser for Treaty Affairs, within the Office of the Legal Adviser, provides guidance on all aspects of U.S. and international treaty law and practice. It manages the process under which the Department of State approves the negotiation and conclusion of all international agreements to which the U.S. will become a party. It also coordinates with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on issues involving the Senate’s advice and consent to ratification of treaties. Read more about the Office of Treaty Affairs

***

To date, the U.S. State Department has no secured refugee agreements with a permanent status as a result of the Afghanistan refugee crisis. Some countries are cooperating only on a temporary basis while conditions and vetting has been satisfied. This now forces the United States to essentially accept the high majority of the refugees which could exceed perhaps as many as 1.0 million. Today, several of our military bases across the globe and those inside the United States have become refugee camps with no end in sight.

Anyone remember the Syrian refugees and the continuing crisis throughout Europe? Even Germany is deporting Syrian refugees.

***

As of August 31, 2021 via Newsweek

U.S.

Afghans who aided the U.S. war effort can be eligible for special immigrant visas, but those who don’t qualify can look to resettle in the U.S. in other ways.

Earlier this summer, the Biden administration expanded its Afghan refugee program and created a new category for those who worked with U.S.-based news outlets or nongovernmental organizations.

As many as 50,000 Afghans could also arrive in the country on “humanitarian parole,” an immigration tool that allows people to enter the country without visas for urgent humanitarian reasons.

The Biden administration has not announced exactly how many Afghan refugees will be taken in by the U.S., but has committed to resettling up to 125,000 refuges in the 2022 fiscal year.

U.K.

Earlier this month, the U.K. government announced plans to welcome 5,000 Afghan refugees this year and resettle a total of 20,000 Afghans in the coming years.

The Afghan Citizens’ Resettlement Scheme would prioritize women and girls as well as religious and other minorities who are at most risk from the Taliban, the government said.

 

Afghan refugees in Manchester
People believed to have recently arrived from Afghanistan stand in the courtyard of a hotel near Manchester Airport on August 25, 2021 in Manchester, England.CHRISTOPHER FURLONG/GETTY IMAGES

Canada

Canada has said that it will take in 20,000 refugees from Afghanistan, focusing on those in danger from the Taliban, including government workers and women leaders.

The country’s Immigration Minister Marco Mendicino has said Canada would consider taking in additional refugees on behalf of the U.S. or other allies, if asked.

Mexico

Mexico welcomed a group of 124 Afghan media workers and their families on Wednesday.

The country had accepted its first group of refugees from Afghanistan on Tuesday, when five women and one man arrived in Mexico City, according to the Associated Press.

Mexico’s interior secretary, Olga Sánchez Cordero, said Wednesday that Mexico would grant asylum “to those Afghan citizens who require it.”

Germany

Germany has indicated that some Afghan refugees will be accepted, but numbers have not been specified.

Chancellor Angela Merkel faced criticism after Germany opened its borders to over a million migrants, mostly Syrians and Iraqis, six years ago.

After the Taliban takeover, Merkel said her government was focused on ensuring Afghan refugees “have a secure stay in countries neighbouring Afghanistan.”

France

In a televised address after the Taliban takeover, President Emmanuel Macron said Europe must protect itself from a wave of Afghan migrants.

He said France would “protect those who are in the most danger” but added that Europe “cannot take on the consequences from the current situation alone.”

Pakistan

Most Afghan refugees cross over the border into neighboring Pakistan.

In June, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan told The New York Times that the country would seal its border if the Taliban took control as it did not want another wave of refugees from Afghanistan.

The country was already struggling to cope with the estimated three million Afghan refugees already in Pakistan, he said.

Tajikistan

In July, Tajikistan said it was preparing to accept up to 100,000 refugees from its neighboring country.

Uganda

Uganda said it had agreed to a request from the U.S. to temporarily take in 2,000 refugees from Afghanistan. The African nation currently hosts about 1.4 million refugees.

Albania, North Macedonia and Kosovo

Albania and North Macedonia have also accepted a U.S. request to temporarily take in Afghan refugees, accepting 300 and 450 refugees respectively. Kosovo has also agreed to temporarily host refugees headed for the U.S., but numbers have not been specified.

Switzerland

The Swiss government has said it will not accept large groups of refugees arriving directly from Afghanistan.

Austria

Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz has ruled out taking in any more Afghan refugees. In a recent interview, Kurz said Austria had accepted 40,000 Afghans in the past few years, which he described as a “disproportionately large contribution.”

Afghan people climb atop plane
Afghan people climb atop a plane as they wait at the Kabul airport in Kabul on August 16, 2021, after a stunningly swift end to Afghanistan’s 20-year war.WAKIL KOHSAR/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

Turkey

Turkey hosts the largest number of refugees out of any country in the world, but has been ramping up construction of a border wall to keep further influxes of migrants out.

There are 182,000 registered Afghan migrants in Turkey and up to an estimated 120,000 unregistered ones, according to Reuters.

But the country’s president Recep Tayyip Erdogan has urged other European countries to take responsibility for those fleeing Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover, saying Turkey had no intention of becoming “Europe’s migrant storage unit.”

Iran

Iran already hosts 780,000 Afghans refugees, according to the U.N. refugee agency.

Emergency tents for refugees were set up in three Iranian provinces which border Afghanistan.

However, Hossein Ghassemi, the country’s interior ministry border affairs chief, has said that any Afghans who have crossed into Iran would be repatriated once conditions improve.

Russia

President Vladimir Putin has said Russia will not accept Afghan refugees because he does not want militants entering the country disguised as refugees.

“We don’t want militants under the disguise of refugees to appear here [in Russia] again,” he said Sunday, according to the TASS news agency.

“We will do everything, in particular in contact with our Western partners, to ensure stability in Afghanistan as well. But we do not want a repeat of the situation of the 1990s and early 2000s.”

Australia

Australia has pledged to take in 3,000 Afghan refugees within an existing annual allocation of its humanitarian visa program. Prime Minister Scott Morrison has indicated the number could be increased, referring to it as “a floor, not a ceiling.”

Meanwhile, the country has also begun a campaign to deter Afghan refuges from trying to reach Australia by boat.

“Australia’s strong border protection policies have not and will not change,” Karen Andrews, Australia’s minister for home affairs, said in a video posted on YouTube Monday.

“No one who arrives in Australia illegally by boat will ever settle here. Do not attempt an illegal boat journey to Australia. You have zero chance of success.”