Austria: 90% Muslim refugees end up on welfare

When they arrive

You can call them asylum seekers or refugees--same old, same old, but in Austria, the reality is that nine out of ten of them wind up on welfare and the Austrian taxpayers foot the bill.

Austrian Interior Minister Wolfgang Sobotka is doing all he can to resist the EU's efforts to send more asylum seekers to Austria by increasing the quota. He claims that 90 percent of them end up on welfare and strain the system.

Sobotka says that "Austria has borne the main load from 2014 to 2017," and "Our system is simply overwhelmed."

It needs to be emphasized that no Arab Gulf countries (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and the UAE)  has taken in any Syrian refugees, for example. 

And a more recent report (Jan. 2016) says Arab monarchies turned down refugees fearing security threat. 

"If you look at the asylum seekers, you can see that 90 percent are migrating to the needs-oriented minimum security system," Sobotka said, adding that border security is of great importance. "We had up to 15,000 refugees per day on some days, today it is an average of 30."

"It is important to keep the pressure on those who bring migrants illegally to Europe via the Mediterranean and in other ways," he added and said that if the EU fails to keep up the pressure, it will be a sign for human smugglers who will double their efforts to smuggle more people into Europe.

The EU's migrant distribution plan is viewed as unfair in many EU countries and some such as Hungary and Poland have rejected the plan altogether. 

Hungary and Slovakia appealed to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) saying that the distribution agreement was invalid because it didn't have unanimous consent from member states and their citizens.

But the ECJ rejected the appeal and membership to the EU is looking less and less representative of a democratic or republic-style union.

When they are in the majority

Heinz-Christian Strache, chairman of the anti-mass migration Freedom Party (FPÖ), said the figures "show how deeply we are in a crisis of fairness," and urged the Austrian public to vote out the current Austrian People's Party-Social Democrat coalition "before the Austrian population changes" [to a Muslim-dominating society]. 


Tweet

Oh No O'Malley, Not That!

Former Maryland governor and Democratic presidential candidate Martin O'Malley believes the U.S. should allow at least 65,000 Syrian refugees to enter the country, but not in his home town. Not now, not ever.

"Kumbayah mah Lord"

Our so-called president, Barack Obama proposed to take 5 to 6 thousand refugees into the country this year, but O'Malley FEELS that if Germany, which is a country with one-fourth the U.S. population can take in 800,000 refugees, we should do more.

Since when is this a competition with another country? Since when does another country set the example for the U.S.? It's almost like assuming our leader would want an international organization like, say, the U.N., to dictate their definition of law and order. Wait . . . never mind.

Libtard O'Malley said in a statement on Friday:

"I support the call from humanitarian and refugee organization for the United States to accept at least 65,000 Syrian refugees next year. If Germany--a country with one-fourth our population--can accept 800,000 refugees this year, certainly we--the nation of immigrants and refugees--can do more."

O'Malley claimed the number of refugees the U.S. is scheduled to accept next year isn't enough, but he doesn't want them living anywhere near him, one can imagine. The image of that toddler's body washing up on a Turkish beach should motivate the U.S. to do more, he said, but the images of Islamic State beheadings, not so much.

Of course we know that this is a real problem, partly due to failed U.S. leadership in Libya and Syria with our so-called president whose loyalties are obfuscated by his ego-driven need for a legacy. Nobody wants to see dead babies washed up on some beach.

The truth, however, is that the U.S. cannot help everyone in the world. We already have borders more porous than a bullet-ridden sieve, and those wealthy Gulf states, as well as Tehran, refuse to assuage the situation by taking in refugees.

Instead, these same Gulf states are financing terrorism and have no plans of taking in these hundreds of thousands of Muslims in spite of the room their countries have to accomodate these desperate people.

The 65,000 refugees O'Malley suggests we take in, is not a huge number, I admit, but it will be the siren call to many more refugees and among them will surely be terrorists who will do what they love doing.

One British man wrote, "Please do NOT let these illegal immigrants into your country. I live in England where we are almost overrun with these economic leeches. They live in London's parks, have been pictured urinating on War Memorials and fornicating in public as well as pushing street crime figures through the roof."

I will not categorize all of these refugees that way; to do so would be akin to saying all cops are targeting black people. That's the "Black Lives Matter" mentality.

But I certainly believe that crime will increase and among the refugees will be terrorists who will take advantage of our good intentions.

The road to BOOM! is filled with good intentions. 



Tweet