State Department Patriots vs. Sen. Sam Brownback—”Conservative” Treason Lobby Mouthpiece

Arch-immigration enthusiast
Senator Sam Brownback (R, Kansas) is a leader of
the human rights movement and an advocate of
"immigration reform"
worthy of emulation
by

Democrats
.

That is, according to New York
Times
columnist Nicholas D Kristof. [When
the Right Is Right
, December 22, 2004]

"Immigration reform" in this
context means

amnesty and mass immigration in perpetuity
…or at
least until conditions in the
receiving country
have reached those of the sending
countries—most likely by deteriorating—and the
immigration stops by itself.

The NYT loves to quote this
fashionable politician, one of the main Senate backers
of endless legislation aimed at increasing
immigrant, refugee and asylee
flows to the U.S.

But this nauseating dollop of
sycophancy should revolt—and alarm—conservative Kansans.

A convert to

conservative Catholicism,
Brownback hails from the

evangelical Protestant
wing of the political/social
right, but is beloved of the left-wing American
Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA)
as well as the

business immigration lobby
. When he briefly held the
Chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, the
AILA bestowed the ultimate stamp of approval on
Brownback`s chairmanship by saying he served in the

"[Spencer] Abraham tradition."

But a funny thing happened when
discussions and plans for resettling the so-called
Somali Bantu
took place during Brownback`s time on
the committee at the beginning of the first Bush
administration.

Because of his enthusiasm for
refugee resettlement, the State Department had planned
to send a large group of
Somali Bantu to Kansas.

The Senator balked. "I never
requested 10,000 Bantu to be placed in Kansas"
he
claimed in October 2001.

Telling Kansans that he
"contacted the Department of State asking them to not
resettle any Somali Bantu refugees in the state of
Kansas"
he moaned on about the refugees` lack of
English, adding "they would not work well in Kansas."

But even if Kansas had taken the
entire
tribe—which is already 30% larger than the
State Department`s original estimate of 10,000—the
state`s arriving immigrant-to-host population ratio
would still be less than the ratio for the U.S. as a
whole.

No matter. The tribe was "a huge
population for a state of our size."
Brownback vowed
that "simply put this [resettlement] should
not occur."
[Brownback
clarifies position on refugee issue: No Bantu
,
by Rob Roberts, Johnson County [KS] Sun,
October 17, 2001]

That`s how the Somali Bantu came to
be spread over 50 American cities—a much more expensive
and difficult resettlement effort than initially
planned.

Now here is where it really gets
interesting.

It may be

hard to think of the State Department
as a

`thin blue line`
against the rising chaos the refugee program is
bringing. But there are some people at State (not Bush
appointees) who are concerned about the program.

These patriots are particularly
skeptical of the federal refugee contractors and their
legislative henchmen in Congress, who dictate the terms
of the resettlement program.

At the time of the Somali Bantu
fiasco, there were suggestions that someone in the State
Department had deliberately embarrassed Senator
Brownback by sending him the whole tribe. (You want
refugees? We`ll show you refugees.)

The plan would have been
spectacularly successful—if the
Establishment media had reported on the Senator`s
response.

Instead, the story was ignored. The
New York Times only reported


"refugee experts say that one United States community,
which they did not name,
[emphasis added]
has expressed misgivings about taking in the Somali
Bantu".
[Somali
Bantu, Trapped in Kenya, Seek a Home,
December 9,
2001, by Marc Lacey, (pay archive)]

That “community`s”
misgivings, or more accurately open revolt, carried the
day—because they were represented by Senator Brownback.

It is almost certain that reporters
and editors at the Times

knew the details
of the affair. If they didn`t, they
get the
Pulitzer Prize
for

Laziest Reporting
. The entire affair was reported
several times in the local Kansas press.

It is true that certain "refugee
experts"
were refusing to talk, but that`s what we
have

rolodexes
for. The event was widely known and
discussed in the refugee contractor industry and a
couple of phone calls should have brought the facts to
light.

Had the real story run in the
Times
, perhaps would not have heard from the Senator
on this topic again. We might never have had to read
such imbecilities from Kristof as

"The
other day, Mr. Brownback told me enthusiastically about
his trip to northern

Uganda
and urged me to write about

brutalities
there. I was disoriented—I thought I was
the one who tried to get people to pay attention to
remote places."

U.S.

refugee resettlement contractors,
whose main Senate
champion is still—you guessed it—Senator Brownback, have
gone so far as to refuse aid to refugees
overseas
if it affects, even temporarily, their
lucrative resettlement contracts. (I`ll blog on this
shortly.)

Long ago they dropped out of
government programs where they would have been required
to put up their own resources to fulfill their mission.

Hypocrisy,

Intrigue
, Ulterior
motives
and

greed
characterize this business.

Apparently it will be a long time
before this news is
“fit to print”
for the average NY Times
reader.


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