Obstacles Keep Iraqi Refugees From U.S.

NYTimes ^ | August 29, 2007 | SABRINA TAVERNISE and DAVID ROHDE

[RDTF]

BAGHDAD, Aug. 28 — Despite a stepped-up commitment from the United States to take in Iraqis who are in danger because they worked for the American government and military, very few are signing up to go, resettlement officials say.

The reason, Iraqis say, is that they are not allowed to apply in Iraq, requiring them to make a costly and uncertain journey to countries like Syria or Jordan, where they may be turned away by border officials already overwhelmed by fleeing Iraqis.

The United Nations, which defines a refugee as someone who has fled his or her home country, has submitted more than 9,000 Iraqis to the United States for consideration since the State Department announced a new resettlement program in February.

But only about 5 percent of the applicants are former employees of the American war effort, according to figures provided by the United Nations and the International Organization for Migration, the agencies processing the cases.

This year, for the first time, administration officials began publicly discussing the special dangers faced by Iraqis working with Americans here and acknowledging the need to grant them safety in the United States.

To that end, the administration has set up a special program for a small number of Iraqis, which gives preferential treatment to full-time employees of the American Embassy, about 125 in Baghdad, and to 500 interpreters by allowing them to skip the lengthy United Nations refugee process once they leave Iraq.

But thousands more Iraqis work for the United States through contractors like Titan, a subsidiary of L-3 Communications; DynCorp International; Parsons Corporation; and Triple Canopy, and their subcontractors.

-snip-

[SirJohnBarleycorn]

The 9/11 terrorists themselves came in through legal channels.

[AuntB]

I would allow a very small number of people in truly extraordinary circumstances to be resettled in the U.S. As to 500,000 Iraqis? NFW.

I don't disagree with you. I would venture to say, from past history, it'll be more than that.

[caltrop]

They also managed to keep the passengers sitting in their seats while they flew into the WTC and Pentagon. Today taking over a plane would require getting past the passengers and, I hope, entering the country legally would require getting past a bunch of watch lists.

[SirJohnBarleycorn]

I hope, entering the country legally would require getting past a bunch of watch lists.

But why should anyone believe such "watch lists" include all people, or even most people, or even a significant minority of the people who are potential terrorists?

Do the Emirs of Waziristan send the US DHS a list every summer of all graduates (with their fingerprints) from radical madrassas in the past year?

Does the US government have identifying information on all people who are members of, or sympathize with, al-Qaeda in Iraq?

Does the CIA have secret listening devices in mosques around the world, used to identify the "radical" imams and their followers as opposed to the "moderate" imams and their followers?

Until the threat of Islamic terrorism is greatly reduced, the United States should, along with everything else it is doing in the War on Terror, restrict and greatly scrutinize the immigration of muslims from terrorist-producing countries (including Britain).