Powered by WebAds

Wednesday, July 08, 2009

The Palis are coming, the Palis are coming!

The US State Department has confirmed that as many as 1,350 'Palestinians,' who were formerly the pampered subjects of Saddam Hussein, are going to be 're-settled' in the United States, mostly in southern California, which of course can afford to host them (Hat Tip: Memeorandum). The 'Palestinians' will be arriving starting this fall.
It will be the largest-ever resettlement of Palestinian refugees into the US – and welcome news to the Palestinians who fled to Iraq after 1948 but who have had a tough time since Mr. Hussein was deposed in 2003. Targeted by Iraqi Shiites, the mostly-Sunni Palestinians have spent recent years in one of the region's roughest refugee camps, Al Waleed, near Iraq's border with Syria.
The discrimination against the 'Palestinians' had nothing to do with them being Sunnis. It had to do with the fact that they were Saddam Hussein's favorite group and therefore ordinary Iraqis resented them. It's not clear to me why that means the US has to clean up the mess. But the Christian Science Monitor blames Israel for American reluctance to take 'Palestinian refugees.'
The US reluctance to accept Palestinians is because it "doesn't want the refugee program to become an issue in its relationship with Israel," says a diplomat in the region, who requested anonymity because he is not cleared to talk to the press. But these Palestinians, he says, will be processed as refugees from Iraq.
As far as this Israeli is concerned, I'm happy to have the 'Palestinians' go to any country (other than Israel) that will take them.

In The Corner, Mark Krikorian, who directs the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C., is not pleased that the US is taking the 'Palestinians' for reasons that have nothing to do with Israel.
Besides the specific problem of welcoming to our shores people who danced in the streets at the destruction of the Twin Towers, there's the more general issue of resettling as refugees people who have somewhere else to go. There are 21 members of the Arab League, other than Iraq, that could take these Palestinians, and if they don't want to (and they don't) then we should apply pressure to our "friends" in the Arab world to make them do so. Resettlement in America, regardless of the total numbers (and I obviously prefer lower numbers), should be reserved only for those who can't stay where they are and will never have anywhere else to go. Many, perhaps most, of those resettled here as refugees don't fit that description, these Palestinians being simply the latest example.
As to specifically sending 'Palestinians' to southern California, maybe it's a way of giving the state a bailout. You know, give them some stimulus money to take care of the 'Palestinians.' Southern California is used to 'Palestinians.' They produce lots of children there (yes, that's why Octomom's picture is at the top of this post). Besides, Dearbornistan is full these days.


Sweetness and Light quips:
Frelick, who has visited a camp on the Jordanian border, said the Iraqi Palestinians are "apolitical," and "basically desperate, scared, miserable, and ready to just get out of Iraq."
Gee, they sound a lot like those ‘apolitical’ Somalis who we are now happily ensconced in scenic Minnesota. That is, when they aren’t returning to the Middle East to participate in Jihad against the US.
Yup. And they're all yours now, so enjoy them.


At 3:56 AM, Blogger NormanF said...

The Arab regimes which oppress and mistreat their Arab brethren have no right to hold Israel to account for the Palestinians' plight. It will forever be a black mark on the history of the Arab World.


Post a Comment

<< Home