United States Ranks #3 in Refugee Destinations

Posted on November 9, 2015November 9, 2015 by Denise Simon

From the UN: The current refugee crisis arising from civil upheaval in the Middle East and Africa has caused over 4.1 million people to flee Syria alone since 2011. While the majority of asylum seekers in the region initially flee to neighboring countries (more than a quarter of the population resident in Lebanon is Syrian) most aspire to establish refugee status in Europe.

Despite the European Union’s Dublin Treaty, which states that an asylum seeker must apply for asylum in their country of first entry into the union, many are moving north to places that promise higher economic chances. At the top of their list: Germany, which expects to receive 1.5 million asylum seekers in 2015. This recent influx has resulted in diverse reactions in the European political and social spheres. Photographs of fences erected around Hungary and Austria’s border to Slovenia, and Hungarian camerawoman tripping a man fleeing with his son evidence the exclusionary sentiment present on the continent, supported by growing right wing movements.

And yet some countries and politicians have insisted that they can and will accommodate large numbers of refugees.

What makes a country a ‘good’ country for refugee resettlement, fairly assuming their burden in the global community? Here are four countries on three continents that both quantitatively and qualitatively stand out.

With as many refugees arriving in Europe last month than all of last year, this question of where they can and should resettle is all the more urgent.

1)   Germany. The huge migration of refugees seeking asylum in Germany in autumn of 2015 has dominated the news for months. Many believe that this sudden influx arose from rumors spread through co-nationals living in Germany that refugees would encounter both physical and economic security, if they made it to this EU leader. Angela Merkel made headlines with her strong position in favor of processing the huge numbers of refugees. “If Europe fails on the question of refugees, then it won’t be the Europe we wished for.” German Interior Minister Thomas de Maizere characterized the influx as “challenging but not overwhelming.” Germany now expects 1.5 million asylum applications this year alone, the highest in Europe. Last year, Germany accepted 40,000 applications, granting asylum to more individuals than any other European country.

2)   Sweden. It is important to discern between countries that process and temporarily provide residence to, and those that actually recognize large numbers of asylum seekers (the above case of Germany does both). When considering the total accepted asylum applications in relation to the overall country population, Sweden tops the charts. Sweden has historically accepted refugees from across the globe, beginning with those fleeing authoritarian rule in Chile during the 1970s. In 2013, the Swedish Migration Board granted Syrian refugees permanent residence in Sweden. In Sweden, the rights granted to refugees on account of this permanent status—immediate capacity to work, choosing place of residence and family reunification—are notable and vital for quality of life.

3)   The United States. Influenced by its political and military position regarding conflict in Syria, the U.S. has not favorably made the news on the current refugee crisis, offering to resettle only approximately 10,000 Syrian refugees. Yet looking holistically at its system reveals a sunnier picture of U.S. refugee policy. The United States permanently resettles more refugees than any other country in the world, historically taking half of all applications received via the UN Refugee Agency. Last year, this amounted to about 70,000 refugees worldwide who, for the most part, were living in limbo in the country to which they fled. The USA may not be a viable option for Syrian refugees, but large numbers of refugees from elsewhere are routinely resettled in the USA.

4)   Brazil. Comprehensively evaluating policies though a survey rating refugees’ actual access to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, as well as national human rights legislation, the World Refugee Survey 2013 grades countries based on refoulement/physical protection; detention/access to courts; freedom of movement and residence; and right to earn a livelihood. The only country reciving an “A” grade in all categories is Brazil. Additionally, the reciprocal entry policy between Brazil and numerous African countries allows asylum seekers to circumvent dangerous routes and smuggling often used by those attempting to reach the United States or Europe. Brazil, whose little known refugee system may not excel quantitatively (although asylum requests have exploded from a mere 560 in 2010 to 12,000 in 2014), excels qualitatively in its refugee resettlement policies.

Meanwhile, who is among those refugees?

Al Qaeda Terror Boss Discovered On Migrant Boat, Authorities ‘Tried To Hide News’

A convicted terrorist has been caught trying to smuggle himself into Europe by posing as an asylum seeker, in a stark event proving correct those who warned of terrorists taking advantage of the European Union’s lax border controls.

BreitbartLondon: Ben Nasr Mehdi, a Tunisian who was first arrested in Italy in 2007 and sentenced to seven years imprisonment for plotting terror attacks with an Islamic State-linked group, was caught trying to re-enter the country last month.

Authorities discovered him among 200 migrants who were rescued at sea and taken to the island of Lampedusa. Although he gave a false name, migration officers identified him through finger print records, the Independent reports.

German channel n-tv claims the Italian government initially tried to hide the story to avoid “panic” and “scare tactics”. The news did not emerge until several days after Mehdi had been detained last week.

Mehdi was then interrogated for several days before being deported back to Tunisia, where he was handed over to local police.

The revelation will likely add to fears that Islamist terrorists are using the migrant crisis as a means to enter Europe.

In April, UKIP leader Nigel Farage told the European Parliament that terrorists would try to exploit the crisis. He told MEPs: “When ISIS say they want to flood our continent with half a million Islamic extremists they mean it, and there is nothing in [the Common European Asylum Policy] that will stop them.

“I fear we face a direct threat to our civilisation if we allow large numbers of people from that war torn region into Europe.”

The following month, Italian authorities arrested Abdel Majid Touil, a Moroccan accused of being involved in a terror attack on the Bardo museum in Tunisia. He had smuggled himself into Italy on a migrant boat in February.

Italian Interior Minister Angelino Alfano has until now insisted there is no evidence that Islamist terrorists are smuggling themselves into the country among the thousands of migrants, but his ministry has admitted that Ben Nasr Mehdi is exceptionally dangerous.

When police arrested him in 2007, they found explosive detonators, poisons and guerrilla warfare manuals. Prosecutors said he had been part of a group that was setting up militant cells that had recruited potential suicide bombers.

Authorities intercepted phone calls in which he indicated he had supplied instructions and contacts to terrorists in Damascus, thus marking him out as a senior operative.

European leaders are becoming increasingly worried about the potential terror threat from the migrant crisis. Last month, German Interior Minister Thomas de Mazière said his country had become a “focus of international terrorism” thanks to migration. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg has also expressed similar fears.

Hillary DID Sign the NDA

Posted on November 6, 2015November 6, 2015 by Denise Simon

The FBI is still investigating Hillary yet some interesting items continue to surface and even perhaps be leaked.

Remember when Jen Psaki at the State Department said she did not know whether Hillary signed the appropriate documents on protecting classified material? Heh, well low and behold, Hillary did as is evidenced below.

Hillary Clinton's SCI Nondisclosure Agreement

Thanks to FreeBeacon and DailyMail: Hillary signed State Department contract saying it was HER job to know if documents were classified top secret, and laid out criminal penalties for ‘negligent handling’

Clinton signed ‘Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement’ on her second day at the State Department
It says she was personally responsible for determining if sensitive documents in her possession were classified at the highest level
Spelled out criminal laws under which she could be prosecuted
Hillary has said on the campaign trail that top-secret classified info found on her private email server wasn’t classified originally and it wasn’t her job to know better

Hillary Clinton‘s claim that she was unaware top secret documents on her private email server were highly classified took a hit on Friday, with the revelation of a State Department contract she signed in 2009.

The ‘Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement,’ which Clinton inked during her second day as Secretary of State, declared that she was personally responsible for determining if sensitive documents in her possession were classified at the government’s highest level.

‘I understand that it is my responsibility to consult with appropriate management authorities in the Department … in order to ensure that I know whether information or material within my knowledge or control that I have reason to believe might be SCI.’

SCI – Sensitive Compartmented Information – is the highest level of ‘top secret’ classification, applying to information so sensitive because of the sources and methods used to obtain it that it can only be viewed in a special room, hardened against electronic eavesdropping, constructed for that purpose. The agreement Clinton signed in 2009, which warns against ‘negligent handling’ of state secrets, conflicts with her more recent positions on the presidential campaign trail.

Clinton has said none of the hundreds of classified documents found among emails on her unsecured server were classified at the time she sent or received them, and suggested that without a marking from intelligence officials, she wasn’t expected to know what is classified.

The libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute think-tank obtained the document with Hillary’s signature, which the State Department declassified on Thursday, and gave it to the conservative Washington Free Beacon.

‘I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SCI by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation,’ the agreement Clinton signed states.

The U.S. Intelligence Community’s inspector general has said two of the Clinton emails released by the State Department so far in complying with a federal judge’s order contained SCI-level information, and had to be sanitized by experts before they could be published.

A spokesman for Hillary’s presidential campaign did not respond to DailyMail.com’s request for comment on Friday.

But the text of the agreement spells out plainly that Clinton agreed she was responsible for seeking help if she wasn’t clear about what was classified at the SCI level.

It also spelled out what might happen if she broke the terms of the contract.

‘I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in my termination of my access to SCI and removal from a position of special confidence and trust requiring such access,’ the agreement reads, ‘as well as the termination of my employment or other relationships with my Department of Agency that provides me with access to SCI.’

‘In addition,’ she agreed, ‘I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of SCI by me may constitute violations of United States criminal laws, including provisions of Sections 793, 794, 796, and 952, Title 18, United States Code; and of Section 783(b), Title 50, United States Code.’

‘Nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violations.’

Government officials who sign the same document Clinton signed acknowledge ‘agree that I shall return all materials that may have come into my possession or for which I am responsible because of such access, upon demand by an authorized representative of the United States Government or upon the termination of my employment.’

Clinton never returned her email server to the federal government. She housed it in her Chappaqua, New York home while she was America’s top diplomat, and then moved it when she left the Obama administration – entrusting it to a Colorado company that was not cleared to handle SCI-level documents.

The State Department acknowledged in September that Clinton’s home-brew server also was never authorized to handle such information.

The FBI is currently investigating Hillary’s email mess, in an information dragnet that has also roped in her former chief of staff Cheryl Mills and current top campaign aide Huma Abedin.

Both of those women also signed the DCI nondisclosure agreement.

*** One more thing, there were at least 5 attempts, perhaps even successful by the Russians hacking into Hillary’s emails.

Illegals Just Released Their Bill of Rights/Demands

Posted on November 5, 2015November 5, 2015 by Denise Simon

Illegal immigrants release ‘Bill of Rights’
Demand citizenship, birth certificates, medical care

The team of people behind this is found here.
WashingtonTimes: An immigrant-rights group proposed a “Bill of Rights” for illegal immigrants Thursday, demanding that Americans recognize there are millions already in the country who deserve health care, in-state tuition rates for college and a guarantee of citizenship in the long term.

The purpose of this document is to awaken and instill courage and cooperation among our leaders, to grow public awareness and to create a crisis of conscience where Americans have to do more than talk about us; they have to talk with us. They must approach this discussion with respect for our determination to add our story to the nation’s proud immigrant anthology.

We’re already here and have been for years. We work hard, take care of our families and have deep roots in our communities. More time is something we don’t have. Our children are getting older without access to equal educational opportunities. Our working adults are unable to reach any kind of wage parity and advance in their professions. We live with no sense of security that our lives won’t be disrupted, our families torn apart. And we’re constantly berated and stereotyped as a monolithic group to be condemned and ostracized. Being discouraged is one thing; losing all hope of working our way toward legal acceptance is something we can’t abide and the nation can’t afford – morally or economically. Read more from their own website here.

The list of demands runs 10 items long — the same as the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights — and also calls for an end to arrests and deportations for “all law-abiding undocumented Americans.” The document was circulated by United We Stay, which is a group of illegal immigrants, first generation Americans and human rights activists pushing for changes to immigration law.
“We know we have human rights, even though our very presence is deemed illegal and our existence alien. Now we have our own Bill of Rights and we want it to be the framework for every immigration decision going forward from the local to the national level,” the group said in a statement announcing their demands.

The 10 points include a demand that they be accorded respect; calls for citizenship rights and an immediate deferment of deportations; in-state tuition at public colleges; “wage equality”; medical care; and protection against deportation if illegal immigrants report a crime as a witness.

The list also includes a specific demand for “compelled authorization of birth certificates for our U.S.-born children.” That appears to be pushback against the state of Texas, where officials have ruled that parents must present valid ID to get children’s birth certificates — and have deemed the Mexican government’s Matricula Consular ID card not to be acceptable as primary identification.

A federal court has allowed that Texas policy to go into effect, ruling that there are questions about the reliability of the Mexican cards and that state officials have an interest in making sure only authorized relatives are able to get birth certificates.

The list of rights begins with a protest against the terms “illegal” and “alien.” Immigrant-rights advocates say both terms are dehumanizing, and have offered “undocumented workers” or, in the case of United We Stand, “Undocumented Americans,” as their preferred term.

The document is meant to serve as a goalpost for the ongoing immigration debate. Immigrant-rights groups had been gaining ground in recent years, with polls suggesting Americans were increasingly open to legalization.

A legalization bill even passed the Senate in 2013 — but Democrats, who controlled the chamber, never sent it to the GOP-run House for action.

The issue then stalled last year after President Obama took unilateral action to grant a deportation amnesty to as many as 5 million of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. Federal courts have put that amnesty on hold, but Mr. Obama’s other policies stopping deportations for most illegal immigrants remain in place, which has effectively checked off one of the list of rights’ demands.

Senator Cruz Lights the Fuse Against Terrorism

Posted on November 5, 2015November 5, 2015 by Denise Simon

Cruz joins fight to label Muslim B’hood ‘terrorist organization’

Sen. Ted Cruz and several House Republicans are leading a new legislative effort aimed at compelling the U.S. government to label Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood a “foreign terrorist organization.”

“This bill recognizes the simple fact that the Muslim Brotherhood is a radical Islamic terrorist group,” Cruz said upon the introduction of his Senate version of the bill. “A number of our Muslim allies have taken this common sense step, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the [United Arab Emirates].”

“The group supports and stands behind numerous terrorist organizations that are responsible for acts of violence and aggression,” said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., the lead House sponsor. “It is time for Congress and the Department of State to recognize and sanction them as they deserve, as a foreign terrorist organization.”

The bill, the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act, asks Secretary of State John Kerry to label the organization a foreign terrorist organization within 60 days, or to present a report to Congress detailing why he opted against doing so. Much more here. To read the proposed Senate legislation titled: To require the Secretary of State to submit a report to Congress on the designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization, and for other purposes.

Nearly 200 U.S. troops have been killed and nearly 1,000 injured by Iranian-made explosives in Iraq, according to new disclosures from a partially declassified report conducted by U.S. Central Command and described by sources to the Washington Free Beacon.

The number of U.S. deaths resulting from Iranian terrorism were revealed for the first time on Wednesday by Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) during a hearing focusing on the Obama administration’s failure to prosecute terrorists directly responsible for the deaths of Americans.

At least 196 U.S. service members fighting in Iraq were killed directly as a result of Iranian-made explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs, according to Cruz and congressional sources familiar with Centcom’s mostly classified report.

The deaths took place between 2003 and 2011. The Iranian explosive devices wounded another 861 U.S. soldiers, and a total of 1,534 attacks were carried out on U.S. military members over this period, according to sources familiar with the report, which was provided to Cruz’s office.

The explosive devices are a “hallmark weapon” of Iran’s Quds force, a paramilitary group that operates outside of Iran’s borders, according to sources familiar with the report. It has been determined that only Iranian-backed operatives use these weapons in Iraq.

U.S. military leaders disclosed in testimony before the Senate that Iranian terror activities have claimed the lives of around 500 U.S. soldiers, which accounts for at least 14 percent of all American casualties in Iraq from 2003 to 2011.

“That blood is on Iran’s hands,” Cruz said Wednesday afternoon during a hearing on the Obama administration’s decision to not prosecute terrorists who have murdered American citizens and troops abroad.

“Iran has been and still is at war with the U.S.,” Cruz said. “Yet despite the slaughter and maiming of an untold number of America citizens … the U.S. government has rather shockingly failed time and time again to fulfill its sovereign duty to obtain justice for its citizens. Our government has failed terror victims in a number of ways.”

Palestinian terrorists, many of them supported by Iran, have killed more than 53 Americans. The Department of Justice has not prosecuted a single person, Cruz said.

Those testifying at the hearing said they were alarmed by the government’s hesitation to prosecute terror cases.

“The greatest pain that victims and their families have is watching another incident take place, watching another death,” said Aegis Industries CEO Kenneth Stethem, whose brother, Robert, was killed during the 1985 hijacking of a TWA flight by Iranian-backed Hezbollah terrorists.

“I would like to know if the administration has asked Iran if they’re still at jihad,” Stethem said, adding that separating Iran from terrorism is “like separating light from a flame and heat from a fire.”

“Is it sound policy to give money to a terrorist nation that is at war with us?” Stethem asked, referring to the more than $150 billion in cash assets that will be released to Iran as a result of the recent nuclear accord.

Stethem also said he was concerned by the Obama administration’s failure to hold Iran accountable for recent violations of the accord, which include the testing of ballistic missiles.

“I’d just like to see some accountability,” he said. “And Congress must do it because the administration isn’t.”

Daniel Miller, a victim of Hamas terrorism, recalled how suicide bombers destroyed the Jerusalem café that he and his friends were dining at.

Miller said that he and other victims of Iran-sponsored terrorism attempted to sue the Islamic Republic. After winning more than $70 million in damages, the U.S. government stepped in to argue on Iran’s behalf.

“I expected a battle from Iran” to get the money legally owed, Miller said. “What I didn’t expect was the battle we faced from my own government.”

Lawyers from the Department of Justice filed a brief during one legal processing to protect Iran from having to pay the victims.

“On one side [of the courtroom] was my legal team representing victims of terrorism, and on the other side was the U.S. sitting with its newfound ally Iran,” Miller said.

He also said Obama administration “cares more about protecting Iranian assets than protecting its own terror victims.”

Cruz called the story “disgusting,” “shameful,” and “unacceptable.”

Others at the hearing criticized the Obama administration for interceding in a legal case in which American victims of Palestinian terrorists were awarded billions of dollars in damages. The administration argued in an unprecedented briefing to the court earlier this year that this money should not be paid out to the victims because it would financially cripple the Palestinian government.