Connect with us

Great Reset

Many Migrants in Biden’s ‘Humanitarian’ Flights Scheme Coming in from Safe Countries and Vacation Wonderlands

Published

3 months ago

13 minute read

By Todd Bensman as published June 17, 2024 by the Center for Immigration Studies

In late 2022 and early 2023, President Joe Biden’s Department of Homeland Security launched one of the most unusual humanitarian programs in U.S. immigration history: it unilaterally began authorizing inadmissible Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (thus the shorthand name CHNV Program) and their immediate family members to fly commercially from foreign countries into more than 40 American airports.

The administration has used this legally dubious program to authorize more than 460,000 ostensibly endangered nationals of those four countries to fly directly from undisclosed airports abroad into some 45 U.S. airports from October 2022 through May 2024. They are then released on temporary humanitarian parole of renewable two-year periods with work permits, during which time they are assumed (but not required) to be applying for asylum.

From this massive “rescue” program’s inception, the Biden administration has claimed that its purpose was to provide temporary U.S. sanctuary “for urgent humanitarian reasons” for those facing persecution in their native countries, and thus reduce the incentive to pass through Mexico on “dangerous routes that pose serious risks to migrant’s lives and safety” on their way to illegally cross the U.S. border.

But new information that the Center for Immigration Studies has forced from the government through litigation now reveals that, while all participants are nationals of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, or Venezuela, many are flying to the United States from 73 other nations. (See the list of countries provided by DHS here.)

The departure country list casts serious doubt on whether the Biden administration has used the humanitarian rescue flights program as it was sold to the American public. In fact, the new departure country information shows that many migrants from these four nationalities have been heading to the U.S. from some of the safest, most prosperous nations on Earth, some heralded worldwide as vacation wonderlands. They could not have been suffering urgent humanitarian problems there, nor were they anywhere near dangerous migration trails.

Economic Giants and Vacation Hotspots

CHNV nationals are flying to the U.S. from Iceland and from Fiji and from Greece.

They are flying from the wealthy European Union countries of France and Germany, from Finland and Norway, from the Netherlands and Switzerland, and from Sweden and Italy. They are flying from Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. Presumably, many Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans have reached these countries to settle and work.

The government’s list of 77 departure countries shows that, yes, ostensibly rescue-worthy Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans are indeed flying in from their own troubled countries to take their U.S. humanitarian protection, as most observers would presume.

But they are also getting authorizations to fly from beautiful Caribbean vacation hotspots like Barbados, the Bahamas, Jamaica, Martinique, St. Lucia. St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines.

The publicly stated purposes of the CHNV program, also called the Advanced Travel Authorization (ATA) program, are at odds with the reality that many are departing from models of prosperous stability and safety, whose own residents could never possibly qualify for U.S. humanitarian protection, nor would ask for it.

“I would say this data is evidence that the parole program is not being used to help aliens flee to safety but, rather, as a secondary immigration system that has not been authorized by Congress,” said Elizabeth Jacobs, Director of Regulatory Affairs for the Center for Immigration Studies, who served as Senior Advisor in the Office of the Chief Counsel for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

“The Biden administration is likely paroling in aliens who are already ‘firmly resettled’ in safe and orderly countries but are nevertheless benefitting under the guise of urgent humanitarian or significant public benefit reasons,” Jacobs said.

Withholding the true purpose of a major government program in this way is a serious disservice to the American public, she added.

“Congress delegated DHS limited authority to use parole only for urgent humanitarian or significant public benefit reasons,” Jacobs said. “Misleading the public on the administration’s use of parole prevents voters from understanding the real impact of the administration’s policies and may prevent voters from holding the administration accountable for their abuse of the nation’s immigration laws.”

Managing Border Disorder or an Unauthorized Admissions Program?

In addition to humanitarian rescues, the government also cited a “significant public benefit” to the United States for its foreign flights program, that inadmissible aliens authorized to fly over the border into the U.S. would be less likely to illegally cross the southern border, thus lessening the chaos there.

But never disclosed until now is that the Biden DHS is also authorizing untold numbers to depart on U.S.-bound flights from many safe countries so far away from the U.S. border and Latin America that beneficiaries would never need to march the dangerous trails and crowd the U.S. border.

Cubans, Nicaraguans, Haitians, and Venezuelans the U.S. government has cleared for departure are flying in from far-flung prosperous, low crime countries nowhere near the migrant trails of Latin America or the southern border, like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Hong Kong.

Some are departing from Israel. Before the war with Hamas.

They are flying from Australia.

And from the oil-rich states of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

The government is authorizing some number to fly in from African nations like South Africa, Morocco, and Senegal. Were any of these threatening to add their number to the southern border’s congestion?

Even Vietnam is on the departure country list.

Dispersed Around the World

Immigrants from all four nations apparently have dispersed all over the world seeking work and improved lifestyles. Perhaps things weren’t working out so well in adoptive countries when the Biden administration threw them a lifeline in the flights program. Europe is a good example.

For several years now, thousands of Cubans have flocked to illegally cross the European Union’s external borders, claiming asylum while seeking to work just as they have in the United States. Many have entered the Balkan countries through Serbia or Greece, popular illegal immigration portals of late, seeking eventual resettlement in Spain, Germany, France and elsewhere. While Greece has cracked down somewhat with reported pushbacks of illegal immigrants to Turkey, plenty of Cubans have found long-term residence in other European countries like Italy.

Venezuelans made up about 6 percent of all EU asylum applications in 2023, amounting to about 60,000, mostly in Spain. Unlike the Cubans, Venezuelans can fly to Europe visa-free for tourism and probably need not have crossed borders illegally for their asylum claims. Nicaraguans also have been known to head for Europe in increasing numbers since 2018.

While Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans are rarely deported from the safety and social welfare systems of Europe, perhaps some of them saw surer economic or family reunification prospects when the Biden DHS launched its flights program and decided on a lifestyle upgrade by coming to the United States.

“This information suggests that these people are firmly resettled and if they need to seek protection, then they can seek it in the countries they’re living in,” said Andrew Arthur, a Center fellow and former immigration judge. “If they are coming from anyplace other than Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, they’re simply trading up from the third country that they’re coming from. This literally has nothing to do with asylum claims or anything else.”

The Government’s Fight for Secrecy

The CBP public affairs office did not respond to the Center’s emailed questions asking for an explanation about the surprising diversity of those rescued from often safe and prosperous departure nations. The cold shoulder is no surprise.

The obvious Grand Canyon between the administration’s public justifications for its humanitarian flights program and what it is really doing might explain why the Biden government has fought hard in court to keep the list of departure nations under wraps.

For more than a year, CBP has refused to comply with a Center for Immigration Studies Freedom of Information Act request to name them. CBP lawyers were so steadfastly opposed to their release that they forced the Center into a long and tedious lawsuit. The effort has finally produced only the names of departure countries but little else the Center requested, such as the specific departure airports and the numbers of people leaving each for American airports.

Government lawyers gave the list of 77 countries but refused during settlement negotiations with the Center to provide even a list in rank order of departure volume. In the end, the agency would only agree to disclose the 77 countries in alphabetical order.

The administration was equally secretive about which U.S. airports were receiving the immigrants, and has never agreed to release them to date, although the Center was eventually able to divine that most were flying into Florida. (See “The Florida Gateway: Data Shows Most Migrant Flights Landing in Gov. DeSantis’s Sunshine State”.) The House Homeland Security Committee, which obtained the airport locations by subpoena, later released the information.

Colin Farnsworth, the Center’s Chief FOIA Counsel, said the litigation is now settled and no more information will be forthcoming. He explained, “Although the government had no legitimate claims for withholding the foreign airports the participants of the ATA program were flying from, and their respective departure volumes, CIS determined it was in the public’s interest to quickly obtain the list of related foreign countries by settling the lawsuit, instead of allowing the government to extensively delay the release of any records through a lengthy legal process.”

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
conflict / 29 mins ago

Israel launches new form of terrorism with its exploding pager attacks in Lebanon

Censorship Industrial Complex / 1 hour ago

Canada’s New Greenwashing Rules Could Hamper Climate Action – Grady Semmens

Addictions / 1 hour ago

A city divided: Homelessness and drug crisis fuel tensions in Nanaimo

Censorship Industrial Complex

Canada’s New Greenwashing Rules Could Hamper Climate Action – Grady Semmens

Published on September 28, 2024

By

From Energy Now 

By Grady Semmens

Also added to the mix was the ability for private citizens to lodge complaints with the Competition Bureau (starting June 20, 2025) and placing the onus on companies to prove their claims – effectively making defendants guilty of greenwashing until they can prove their information is valid.

The Government of Canada’s new rules to crack down on greenwashing will likely hamper new energy projects, including those designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions, according to experts who say they pose significant legal risk and create uncertainty for how industries across the country can communicate their plans for reaching net-zero emissions by 2050.

The legislation came into effect on June 20 as part of an omnibus package of economic policies known as Bill C-59. The package contained long-awaited tax credits for carbon capture and storage (CCS) development, sparking positive investment decisions for several new CCS projects over the summer. However, C-59 also included significant amendments to the Competition Act that require companies to more fully substantiate statements about their management of environmental and social issues – with a particular focus on claims related to climate change activity.

The crux of the concern about the anti-greenwashing laws lies in the call for companies to use an ‘internationally recognized methodology’ to report on business interests such as their decarbonization efforts. The government failed to provide guidance for what methodologies meet this standard. At the same time, massive penalties (up to three per cent of a firm’s annual gross global revenues) were introduced for companies found to be making misleading claims. Also added to the mix was the ability for private citizens to lodge complaints with the Competition Bureau (starting June 20, 2025) and placing the onus on companies to prove their claims – effectively making defendants guilty of greenwashing until they can prove their information is valid.

Response to the amendments by Canada’s energy sector was swift and dramatic. Almost immediately, the Pathways Alliance – a partnership of Canada’s largest oil sands producers that are pursuing one of the world’s largest CCS projects – gutted its website and its social media channels have gone quiet. Many energy, mining and other resource-based companies have followed suit, resulting it what some are now calling a ‘greenhushing’ that goes counter to years of admirable progress in corporate transparency and reporting on the management of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues.

“The federal government implementing a law, without consultation, which intrinsically infringes on the ability to participate in open discussions on some of the most important issues facing the country today should be a serious concern for all Canadians,” says Lisa Baiton, president and CEO of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

Looking beyond its impact on public discourse, Baiton says the legislation also creates new roadblocks for developing critical infrastructure to help meet Canada’s climate change commitments.

“The federal government’s approach to these amendments has introduced a new level of complexity and risk for those looking to invest in Canada. The amendments to the Competition Act will make it more difficult for proponents to speak to Canadians and gain public support for their projects, particularly for those focused on reducing emissions.”

One of the country’s top environmental lawyers agrees, adding that Competition Bureau rules apply far beyond websites and sustainability reports, also encompassing the detailed plans and evidence required in regulatory applications for projects.

“Canadian regulatory processes are already protracted, and I think there will be more delays and complications for project approvals as environmental impact assessments will face an additional layer of scrutiny,” said Conor Chell, a partner and national leader of ESG legal risk and disclosure with KPMG, at a recent seminar on the impacts of C-59 on Canadian industry.

The Competition Bureau was gathering public feedback until September 27 on the new greenwashing provisions that it says will be used to provide further guidance for how the rules will be enforced. Industry players hope the consultation will result in greater clarity on what methodologies for environmental reporting the government prefers, along with details on how the bureau’s complaints tribunal will determine which complaints are in the public interest to investigate.

“Companies face a high risk of being unfairly and unnecessarily targeted and pulled into long, drawn out legal proceedings in defence of reasonable statements. Without clear guidance as to how the Competition Bureau plans to handle such frivolous and vexatious claims, this will have a chilling effect on companies’ disclosure and participation in climate and environmental policy discussions,” Baiton wrote in CAPP’s Sept. 5 feedback submission.

In the meantime, Canadian companies are figuring out how to continue reporting on their ESG performance without placing themselves at undue risk of legal action. In its latest corporate social responsibility report published earlier this month, Cenovus Energy chose to omit information on greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental subjects, while continuing to report on topics including workplace safety, engagement with Indigenous communities, and its progress on meeting equity, diversity and inclusion targets in its workforce.

“Given this uncertainty, we made the difficult decision to defer publication of information about our recent environmental performance and plans. I’d like to be very clear that this does not change our commitment to advancing our environmental work. We firmly stand by the actions we’re taking, the accuracy of our reporting and the information we’ve shared to date about our environmental performance. And, to the extent the Competition Bureau can provide clarity through specific guidance about how these changes to the Competition Act will be interpreted and applied, that will help guide our future communications about the environmental work we are doing,” Cenovus’ CEO Jon McKenzie states in his opening message to the report.

With anti-greenwashing regulations being adopted and/or strengthened in many countries, KPMG’s Conor Chell recommends companies revisit their targets and performance metrics for key environmental issues to ensure they are realistic and are backed up by accurate and consistent data.

“Canada now has some of the strongest anti-greenwashing legislation, but it is something that is growing globally, and companies will face it in other jurisdictions,”  Chell said. “Going forward, as important as it will be for the good work to continue, it will be equally important to ensure that companies are thoroughly assessing and substantiating their environmental and social claims, so they can withstand the additional scrutiny that is now required.”

Grady Semmens is a writer and communications consultant specializing in energy, sustainability and ESG reporting.

Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

New Democrat MP introduces bill that would criminalize ‘denial’ of unproven residential school narrative

Published on September 28, 2024

By

Kamloops Residential School

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Calling the system a ‘genocide’ without evidence, Bill C-413 would charge those who ‘promote hatred against Indigenous peoples by condoning, denying, downplaying or justifying the Indian residential school system in Canada.’

A backbencher MP from the socialist New Democratic Party (NDP) has brought forth a new bill that seeks to criminalize the denial of the unproven claim that the residential school system once operating in Canada was a “genocide.”

The new bill, introduced by NDP MP Leah Gazan, if passed, could lead to potential jail time for those who even question the official government narrative regarding the once-mandated residential schools.  

Bill C-413, as written, would charge those who “promote hatred against Indigenous peoples by condoning, denying, downplaying or justifying the Indian residential school system in Canada through statements communicated other than in private conversation.”

The NDP claims, without evidence, that the “residential school system was a genocide” and that it was “designed to wipe out Indigenous cultures, languages, families and heritage. To downplay, deny or justify it is cruel, harmful and hateful. This should have no place in Canada.” 

Those found guilty under the proposed law could face fines of $5,000 or two years in jail.  

News of the bill was immediately blasted by those who point out that to criminalize the “denial” of a still unproven and dubious assertion is beyond the pale.

“Radical leftist NDP MP just tabled a bill that would criminalize so-called residential school denialism. If passed it would be illegal in Canada to say that the residential school system was NOT a genocide… which it was not. This is totally insane,” wrote True North political commentator and journalist Harrison Faulkner.

LifeSiteNews recently reported how one of Faulkner’s podcast episodes, which talked about residential schools, was censored by Spotify because it was “dangerous content.”  

“Body count at the Kamloops Residential School remains at zero. Charge me. I dare you,” wrote Morgan.

As reported by LifeSiteNews in August, the federal cabinet of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said it will expand a multimillion-dollar fund that is geared toward documenting thus far unfounded claims that hundreds of young children died and were clandestinely buried at now-closed residential schools, some of them run by the Catholic Church. 

Canada’s Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations even confirmed it spent millions searching for “unmarked graves” at a now-closed residential school once run by the Catholic Church, turning up no human remains.

In 2021 and 2022, the mainstream media and federal government ran with inflammatory and dubious claims that hundreds of children were buried and disregarded by Catholic priests and nuns who ran some of the schools. 

The Tk’emlups te Secwepemc First Nation was more or less the reason there was a large international outcry in 2021 when it claimed it had found 215 “unmarked graves” of kids at the Kamloops Residential School. The claims of remains, however, were not backed by physical evidence but were rather disturbances in the soil picked up by ground-penetrating radar. 

The First Nation now has changed its claim of 215 graves to 200 “potential burials.” 

Canadian indigenous residential schools, while run by both the Catholic Church and other Christian churches, were mandated and set up by the federal government and ran from the late 19th century until the last school closed in 1996. 

While there were indeed some Catholics who committed serious abuses against native children, the unproved “mass graves” narrative has led to widespread anti-Catholic sentiment since 2021.

Since the spring of 2021, more than 100 churches, most of them Catholic, have been burned or vandalized across Canada.

Continue Reading

Trending

X