HIAS, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, another of the nine federal contractors employed by the US State Department to place refugees into your towns and cities, is focusing on hiring lawyers for the law breakers at the southern border. [For new readers, see nine contractors inthis post.—ed]
HIAS receives more than half of its income from you via your tax dollars to take care of legal refugees who were selected and screened, and yet they are working feverishly to be sure the illegal aliens on the southern border have legal representation.
Recently they sent out an appeal for financial help. Mind you! financial help for an organization that got $24,493,702 directly from the US Treasury in 2016 (according to its Form 990 here)!
Why is our money going to a group promoting a progressive political agenda that large numbers of Americans oppose (if they only knew!)?
This is a screenshot of their recent appeal for more moola…
Below is the page showing their federal grants. Notice that their privately raised dollars that year amounted to $17,361,702, less than half of their income.
I think the fact that they can’t raise enough private money for their ‘good works’ signals that the general public just isn’t that interested in their mission.
If you go to page 9 notice that if they weren’t getting federal funding they would die.
Salary and employee expenses amounted to $20,686,120 and their office expenses, rent and travel amounted to another $7,106,664 while they only took in just over $17 million in private dollars.
Again, if they weren’t getting federal funding they would most likely die. Or, they would have to slash staff or significantly cut the high salaries of top brass!
Have a look at their top salaried positions.
And, btw, let me say that if they were a truly private non-profit (or a for-profit) their salaries would be none of our business, but they aren’t.
They are effectively a government agency which means they can’t keep this information from the taxpayers who pay a significant portion of their salaries!
Endnote: Readers may have noticed many refugee-related stories here at Frauds and Crooks. I am still working to restore Refugee Resettlement Watch and once it is done (soon I think!), many stories like this one will be posted there. However, there is a ‘Charity fraud’ category here at Frauds and Crooks, so stories like this fit right in!
Maybe it might best be described as Hating Trump Voters 101.
I’m not spending a lot of time on this, too much backed up in my posting queue, but I just saw this Opinion piece at the Philadelphia Inquirerthat tells us to see the Southern Poverty Law Center‘s “Hate at School” report. (I’m betting there is nothing in it about how to treat evenTrump supporters with respect.)
Do your kids have the “emotional intelligence” to be ready for the 2020 Presidential election? Indeed are they ready to confront “racism, sexism, and heteronormativity” this year?
If not, may I suggest home schooling!
To confront the 2020 election cycle, we need emotional intelligence in schools | Opinion
In the history classes I teach, I begin with a digital dialogue called “What Gives Us Pause.” Before we begin formal instruction, I invite students to share with each other the social and political currents that worry them most, or make them most hopeful for the future. This dialogue unleashes a flood of student voices.
Every year, students name wars that tear nations apart, gentrification that disrupts the fabric of urban communities, environmental crises, and hate and prejudice. I expect them to talk about the most recent incidents of mass shootings and gun violence right here in Philadelphia. Very quickly, this bonds the classroom in ways that prepare us to support and hold each other accountable, and name patterns of behavior we witness — in the news cycle, on social media, and in our own lived experiences — as the year unfolds.
When I began teaching in 2007, the first years felt sterile. I was discouraged from getting too political or confronting social power structures like racism, patriarchy, or class. I was trained to believe that teachers had to create “safe spaces” that were apolitical and socially neutral. We celebrated civil rights victories but did not discuss the dark legacy of slavery. We didn’t talk about the environment. Textbook-driven instruction drove my practice at the expense of student voices and authentic connections with each other.
Grrrrr! “Student voices!” “Authentic connections!” But, did they learn anything about the Revolutionary War or the Civil War?
I digress…. after a recent visit to the Antietam Battlefield, a friend whispered a question—what about all the northern white families who lost their husbands, fathers and sons fighting to free the slaves, don’t they deserve reparations?
Jobs goes on….
Too often, public conversations stop at simply naming transgressions: identifying something as hurtful or difficult and then moving on. In other cases, policy-driven mandates aiming to keep discourse respectful — like bans on the use of specific words, music, readings, or opinions — leave little room for gray areas. School communities, on the other hand, can model practical responses to and discussions of these moments that young people can use their entire lives, including when confronting racism, sexism, and heteronormativity. [You can bet any students who support our President will never emote in Jobs’ classes!—-ed]
The stakes feel high. The special report “Hate at School”by the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Teaching Tolerance project showed a sharp increase in hate and bias in schools since the 2016 election.
Thankfully, the “Hate at School” report offers many entry points for engaging students, educators, and families in inquiry around how to notice, name, and combat acts of bias and hatred on an ongoing basis — not only when individual moments grow large and public. This defines the work that educators across the nation prepare to engage as school resumes, just over a year out from the 2020 election. [It is all about 2020 to the Progressives.—ed]
Are you looking for a project? Even if your kids are grown, how about looking into what is being taught in your local schools?
My post over the weekend about Michigan teachers being indoctrinated with incomplete information about Islam, see it here, was a huge success on social media.
Fascinating that the beat goes on at the Southern Poverty Law Center. You might think the media (and people like Jobs) would hesitate for a few minutes about using the work of the hypocrites at the SPLC after the incredible airing of their dirty (racist!) linen earlier last spring.
It has been ten years since I wrote the post below at Refugee Resettlement Watch and it occurs to me that there may be some of you scratching your heads and wondering why anyone would want to open our borders and welcome in hordes of impoverished people and put them on taxpayer-funded welfare.
And, you might be wondering why the reaction to the Trump Administration’s very sensible plan to block welfare use for non-citizens announced this past week,see here, is causing Leftwingers heads to explode.
The strategy was once well-known to hardcore Socialists/Communists (aka Progressives) as the Cloward-Piven strategy, but I suspect following generations of young do-gooders and average Americans who have simply been busy working and raising families have no idea that importing poverty is a political strategy.
If you know all about Cloward and Piven, you won’t find anything new here, but for those of you who have never heard those names, please continue reading!
Here is my post from November 2009,
Cloward-Piven: Use the poor to bring on the revolution
If you are a regular reader, you know one of the themes we have been writing about is what I call “community destabilization,” we have a whole category for those posts.
Cloward and Piven, while professors at Columbia University (Obama’s alma mater), penned a 1966 treatise in Nationmagazine in which they outlined a strategyto bring about a revolution in America. I wrote about it most recently, here[Sorry links are dead since the speech police took down RRW, but I am working on getting it restored—ed]
Simply stated the strategy involved flooding the welfare system with so many impoverished people that the system would collapse and that would pave the way for a new form of government—a government that would redistribute the wealth and provide a guaranteed income for everyone.
Below is another shocking segment from that article. We are often lectured about what is the moral thing to do about refugees, but let me ask all of you, what is moral about this Far Left strategy?
Remember immigrants and refugees are today’s poor. As unfashionable as the word is, frankly, I call this strategyto place as many people as possible on the welfare system and use them for promotion of a radical political ideology downright evil.* (Emphasis below mine.)
To generate an expressly political movement, cadres of aggressive organizers would have to come from the civil rights movement and the churches, from militant low-income organizations like those formed by the Industrial Areas Foundation (that is, by Saul Alinsky), and from other groups on the Left. These activists should be quick to see the difference between programs to redress individual grievances and a large-scale social-action campaign for national policy reform.
Movements that depend on involving masses of poor people have generally failed in America. Why would the proposed strategyto engage the poor succeed?
First, this plan promises immediate economic benefits. This is a point of some importance because, whereas America’s poor have not been moved in any number by radical political ideologies, they have sometimes been moved by their economic interests. Since radical movements in America have rarely been able to provide visible economic incentives, they have usually failed to secure mass participation of any kind. The conservative “business unionism” of organized labor is explained by this fact, for membership enlarged only as unionism paid off in material benefits. Union leaders have understood that their strength derives almost entirely from their capacity to provide economic rewards to members. Although leaders have increasingly acted in political spheres, their influence has been directed chiefly to matters of governmental policy affecting the well-being of organized workers. The same point is made by the experience of rent strikes in Northern cities. Their organizers were often motivated by radical ideologies, but tenants have been attracted by the promise that housing improvements would quickly be made if they withheld their rent.
(Remember these are Cloward and Piven’s words!)
Second, for this strategy to succeed, one need not ask more of most of the poor than that they claim lawful benefits. Thus the plan has the extraordinary capability of yielding mass influence without mass participation, at least as the term “participation” is ordinarily understood. Mass influence in this case stems from the consumption of benefits and does not require that large groups of people be involved in regular organizational roles. [Of course not, the smart people, the elite radicals, would call all the shots!]
Moreover, this kind of mass influence is cumulative because benefits are continuous.Once eligibility for basic food and rent grants is established, the drain on local resources persists indefinitely. Other movements have failed precisely because they could not produce continuous and cumulative influence.
When you read the Nation article, note that Cloward and Piven were very conscious of the concept of the ‘presumption of good intentions.’ In other words, they knew that this political strategywould go undetected for a very long time because it would be hidden from their average do-gooder minions by the presumption that this was all about aiding the downtrodden.
I must say this ‘strategy’ is the only logical explanation for why we are still pouring refugees into the US right now  when there is little or no work for them and they are being “warehoused” in decrepit apartment buildings, like those in Bowling Green, KY. [Again, sorry, links to RRW are now dead.—-ed]
Incidentally, even if refugees have chicken plant jobs they still receive various forms of public assistance because the meatpackers no longer pay a living wage.
I wonder did Cloward and Piven ever anticipate the involvement of big businesses as allies in the revolution? See this postfrom August in which I list strange bedfellows on the open borders issue.
* I have to laugh, after I posted this, I see [link not found—ed] that Ann Coulter also suggested Far Left Liberal strategies were “evil” when she said their motto is: Speak loudly and carry a small victim!
The End of the November 2009 post at RRW.
I think you got my message—the border invasion (the mass movement of extreme poverty into American towns and cities) is a Progressive (Communist) political strategy and the migrants are their pawns. (And, their future voters!)
I hope you didn’t miss the part about how they need the churches to help them pull it off!
He just loves twisting their tails as he did in the Ohio rally two nights ago. And, I am so glad he brought up the truly insane Diversity Visa Lottery.
Here we have Think Progress, a preeminent Progressive website that’s been around for nearly 15 years (but losing its luster we see) attempting to get your minds right on how the Diversity Visa Lottery really works (according to them) and how Trump is a dummy.
If you missed it, you might first go back and see my postof last week where I told you that the big winners of the insane green card lottery this year were Russia and Egypt—WTH! We don’t have enough Russians and Egyptians in the US yet! Hereis Think Progresson Trump in Ohio,
Trump reveals he has no idea how the diversity visa lottery works
At a campaign rally in Cincinnati, Ohio, Thursday night, President Donald Trump painted a wildly inaccurate picture to his supporters of how the diversity visa lottery program works. The diversity visa lottery program awards roughly 50,000 green cards each year to citizens from various underrepresented countries to legally live and work in the United States. In turn, lottery recipients “diversify” the U.S. population: in order to qualify for the lottery, an individual must meet a number of merit-based factors, including a certain level of education or comparable work experience.
Stop right there. In that Miami Herald article I quoted last week, we learned that:
Overall, the winner must have at least a high school diploma or its equivalent, or two years’ work experience over the past five years in an eligible occupation that requires at least two years of training or experience.
Can you imagine how easy it would be to falsify that type of information when the applicants are coming from hellhole third world countries! Think Progressgoes on:
In Trump’s mind, however, the diversity visa lottery functions as some kind of Powerball for criminals.
“And you pick people out of the lottery,” Trump said Thursday night, gesturing as if he were picking names out of a hat. “Well let’s see, this one is a murderer, this one robbed four banks, this one I better not say, this one another murderer, ladies and gentlemen, another murderer.” [LOL! A Trumpian description sure to make Leftwingers heads explode!—ed]
Oh good security screening!
Because the diversity visa lottery is self-selecting, it is not up to individual countries — as Trump appears to believe — to decide which of its citizens can be considered for a green card. In addition to the education requirements, all recipients of the visa undergo background checks, health examinations, security screenings, and interviews by consular officers before their arrival in the United States.
And, much to my surprise in the very next paragraph reporter Rebekah Entralgo confirms exactly what Trump is saying:
Trump has frequently railed against the diversity visa lottery program, even threatening to eliminate the program altogether in 2017, after a lottery recipient from Uzbekistan carried out an extremist attack in New York City, killing eight people.
As if it wasn’t bad enough—the media bias, that is—a group I had never heard of is recruiting young ethnically diverse “journalists” to fan out across America into newsrooms at local media outlets in what might be described as a seeding program for furthering their control over the already seriously Left-leaning media.