Senate Sellout Contained Another Atrocity—Brownback`s “Widows And Orphans” Madness


"Going
to America is the holy grail of refugee life. People
will cajole, bribe, threaten and kill for the
opportunity…"
(Refugee Reports, Nov
2002, [PDF]
published by the

pro-refugee Non-Government Organization [NGO]
 U.S.
Committee for Refugees)

From a recent State Department
report (The
United States Refugee Admissions Program: Reforms for a
New Era of Refugee Resettlement
), discussing the
attractions of the West:

"This
magnet effect or pull factor forms an increasingly
pervasive worry for host countries and sometimes for the
Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
in thinking about resettlement initiatives. Those
parties also worry that providing a resettlement option
[
i.e. to the West]
will interfere with pursuit of other durable
solutions—local integration or voluntary repatriation.


“The temptation to

fraud
is great in refugee programs, because
resettlement often represents such a highly valued
solution for persons in desperate situations. In today`s
conditions, the fraud problem has probably worsened,
owing to modern communications and the growth of

organized crime
or other enterprises trying to make
money from facilitating a person`s inclusion in a
resettlement program."

This State Department report is
not, as this quote might appear to imply, a criticism of
the refugee program. Instead, it`s basically a how-to
manual for overcoming

common sense objections to the program
and for
opening up the U.S. to even more refugee and asylee
immigration.

But the Senate needs no such
guidance. Its

intemperate immigration bill
, S2611—known to

VDARE.COM
readers as “The Senate Sellout”—went
beyond even the wildest fantasies of the refugee
contractor lobby. In a little-noticed provision, it
handed the Refugee Industry what could be the biggest
invitation to fraud in the history of the refugee
program. And that`s saying a lot.

For years, Senator

Sam Brownback
(R.-Kansas) has tried to legislate a
so-called humanitarian visa category for "widows and
orphans."
In the latest debate, not only did the
Senator succeed in removing an amendment from S2611 that
would have strengthened "expedited removal" for
bogus asylum seekers, but he was able to include his
"relief for widows and orphans"
act in the bill.
[Sec. 506. The "Widows
and Orphans Act of 2006
"
]

Awww! Who can be against "Widows
and orphans"
?

Except that according to
Brownback`s bill, a "widow" is anyone determined
"to be a female who has a credible fear of

harm related to her sex;
and a lack of adequate
protection from such harm."

And under "orphans" we find
anyone determined to be under "18 years of age…
for whom

no parent or legal guardian
is able to provide
adequate care;
who faces a credible fear of harm
related to his or her age; who lacks adequate protection
from such a harm; and for whom it has been determined to
be in his or her best interest to be admitted to the
United States."
[italics added]

OK—so we are to understand that
"widows and orphans"
is shorthand for the world`s

infinite
oppressed and helpless. 

Got that? It does not mean, well,
"widows" and "orphans"…any more than
“refugees”
necessarily means “refugees.”

Ironically, Senator Brownback has
already successfully thwarted an attempt to resettle
"widows and orphans"
Somali
Bantus
, in this case—in his own state of Kansas. He
said that they

"would not work well in Kansas,"
telling Kansans that he "contacted the
Department of State asking them to not resettle any
Somali Bantus in the state of Kansas."

[Brownback
clarifies position on refugee issue: No Bantu”

By Rob Roberts, Johnson County Sun, October 17,
2001]

In fact, the Refugee Industry has
repeatedly passed up opportunities to share in a
charitable way its

own resources
with "widows and orphans." With
the Brownback bill, it can continue its profitable
import-refugees-and-dump-them-on-the-taxpayer racket as
usual. The "widows and orphans" would be treated
as refugees for purposes of the U.S. domestic refugee
resettlement program—but they would not count against
the refugee quota
that is currently determined each
year by the administration.

Even more importantly, the
"widows and orphans"
will be admitted under a lower
evidentiary standard than

that applied to current refugees
.

Today, refugees must demonstrate a
"well-founded fear" of persecution based on
membership in one of five categories—race,

religion
, nationality, political opinion or

social group.

Admittedly, Congress, the courts
and the administration have shown this definition only
applies when they want it to.

But consider what could happen
under the much weaker definition for "widows and
orphans."
 This group need only demonstrate a

"credible fear"
based on membership in
the group “female” or the group “under 18
years of age.”

These Brownback-favored groups
mirror certain UN refugee categories such as "women
at risk."
The "open floodgates" potential of
such categories—with weakened standards for proof of
persecution to boot—alarm even supporters of the refugee
program.

From the State Department report:

"The `women-at-risk`
criterion is very broadly phrased, and some worried that it could encourage
the courting of harm as a way of qualifying for
resettlement priority….


“…some of UNHCR`s traditional
categories for resettlement referrals, especially the
category for `women at risk`, can become
self-fulfilling. When it becomes known that resettlement
is possible on this ground,

families may separate
to enable the woman to win a
referral for herself and the children and perhaps be
able to bring the husband later…. or 

[women may] even expose
themselves to greater dangers, so as to
try to come within the category.
… The temptations
in this field have also sometimes resulted in damaging
corruption or manipulation on the part of certain UNHCR
officials or others in a responsible role, who find they
can extract large bribes or

other personal favors
for moving certain cases to
the head of the resettlement line."

To top it
off, the report said under the new bill, any
"international organization or recognized
nongovernmental entity designated by the Secretary of
State for purposes of such referrals"
can refer
individuals into the "widows and orphans"
program. 

The State Department audits the
books of some 400 NGOs that

contract with the government for domestic resettlement.

Another 160 receive funding for work overseas in U.N.
refugee camps.

The personnel in many, if not most,
of these NGOs is largely, sometimes exclusively, made up
of refugees and immigrants. They are paid to bring in
more refugees and specialize in using

social and family networks
back home to

earn their pay.

Needless to say, the bill`s
definition of "an international organization or
recognized nongovernmental entity designated by the
Secretary of State for purposes of such referrals"

is not clear. But my guess is this legislation will give
over 500 NGO`s the right to

travel the globe on the U.S. taxpayer`s dime

peddling the "holy grail" of going to America
with all the rights and entitlements of instant U.S.
citizenship.

A recent profile of the Senator in
Rolling Stone—which in true MSM form, makes no
mention of his considerable efforts in the field of
immigration legislation—claims that "sex, in all its
various forms, is at the center of Brownback`s agenda."

But I suspect this

tells us more about the Rolling Stone

than about Sam Brownback. [God`s
Senator
, by Jeff Sharlet, January 25, 2006]

"Ask him what drives him"
according to the article "and he`ll answer without
irony, `widows and orphans.`"

Ask me what drives this aspiring
president of the U.S. and I can only speculate about the
connections between his

recent conversion
to Catholicism, the

religion of the people
he is hoping (to paraphrase

Bertolt Brecht
)

to elect,
and the

cheap labor lobby
money he gets from

agribusiness
.

We also know the global "human
rights"
machine has influence and money to hand out
and even writes much of his material.

I

won`t deny
the Senator`s

sincere if misguided
religious motives in all this.
To do so would imply more cynicism on his part, if not
outright evil, than even I can imagine.

But maybe it is time to start
believing in poltergeists.


Thomas
Allen (
email
him) is a recovering refugee worker.