Category: Testimony for 5/15/2013 State Dept. meeting

Former refugee resettlement worker blows the whistle on refugee program failures; calls for moratorium

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

In a must-read letter to the US State Department a 25-year veteran of the International Rescue Committee (one of the largest of the top nine federal contractors) calls for a moratorium on refugee resettlement until the ORR (Office of Refugee Resettlement) and the volags (contractors) get their act together.

Boston on our minds. The IRC closed its Boston office in 2009. But, several other refugee contractors are still doing business there.

Consider this long-time Boston resident’s comments about fraud and lax security screening in the light of two posts we have written in the last two days, here and here.  It all rings true.

Editor:  This is one more, but, by far the most damning, of the testimony we have been publishing in advance of this Wednesday’s hearing at the US State Department.  All other testimonies we have received are archived here.

(Emphasis below is mine)

Ms. Anne Richard
Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration
US State Department
Washington, DC. 20520

April 27, 2013

Re: Federal Register Public Notice 8241 Comment Request

Dear Ms Richard:

I worked for the IRC in several capacities from 1980 until 2004 (caseworker, deputy director of the Boston office). In 2004, amid increasing budget constraints, I volunteered for a lay off. At the time, my heart was still into the work I loved and I continued to volunteer for two additional years, spending 3 days a week working on the family reunification program, in which I was considered an “expert.”

Early on, I grew familiar with the fraud that was rampant throughout the program, from the refugees themselves (sometimes forgivable), the overseas OPE’s (not forgivable) and on up to the UN (most unforgivable). Most of my colleagues were also aware of it, and while they often joked about it, almost no one did anything to change or challenge it.

In our work, it was all about “getting the numbers,” often at the expense of legitimate screening for “real“ refugees.

To be honest, I never turned a blind eye to obvious fraud, but had been instructed to give all refugee applicants “the benefit of the doubt.” Yet there were many applications about which I had serious reservations. Some of them were classically laughable ( “I don’t remember my mother’s name… let me make a phone call..”). There were more than a few applicants that I rejected (or referred to another Volag that might not have had the same concerns).

Being directly “in the field,” it’s often difficult to objectively see outside the perimeters of our day to day work.

My major concern was helping people re-unite with close and legitimate family members whose relationship I believed to exist in fact. I can’t tell you how many times, after resettlement that those relationships were revealed to be fraudulent. Sometimes the reasons were understandable from a human kindness point of view ( claiming an orphaned niece as a sister), but often those “relationships” were simple financial transactions.

In my long years at the IRC, I assisted many ethnic groups. I can say without reservation that the Somalis were among the most duplicitous. There was a time when I suggested that they swear on the Quran before signing the affidavit of relationship. Most of the time they would flee and not return. That practice was discontinued, being deemed politically incorrect.

All of us in the field know just how weak the “security screening” was. It’s mostly a very poor and ineffective system of simple name checks from countries that for the most part keep no records.

I personally had some concerns about some Iraqi refugees admitted in the mid 90’s.

One of them went on to become implicated in the Oklahoma City bombings. Being a volag worker, I was very protective of him but, having spent hours with him in the emergency room of a mental hospital.  I still have not been able to say to myself that he was not involved.

It is time for a moratorium on refugee resettlement until ORR and the volags get their act together.

Refugee resettlement affects every community it touches, from Lewiston ME, Minneapolis MN,  to Kansas City KS.

The Volags hide behind their time frame responsibility fences. While I agree that they do not have funding to do much beyond initial basic placement, this is hardly adequate for a successful program, when most refugees end up being on long term public assistance.

The present program is really a “resettle and dump on the community” thing. This is not fair to the communities, the refugees or the volags.

ORR has yet to release long overdue federally mandated reports that show welfare dependency rates or employment figures. Some people say that ORR may have something to hide. I tend to agree.

Refugees are not assimilating for the most part. (some argue that refugees should not “assimilate” but “integrate” but , to me, it‘s all the same, since the majority do neither.). The State Dept continues to fund MAA’s (ethnic based organizations) which only keep immigrant and refugee communities separate and ghettoized.

As someone who spent most of my adult lifetime working in this field, I ask for a serious second look at the current program.

After 9/11, I was, as always, very vocal in defense of refugees and the US refugee program , convinced that no one admitted under the program could possibly be or become a terrorist. Regrettably, my mind has changed.

I now believe that we need a moratorium on continued resettlement until such time as ORR can get its house in order and present a restructured program that can provide safe haven for those truly in need and at the same time guarantee that this currently flawed program does not admit persons unworthy of our kind-heartedness or who are unwilling to become a positive part of our national fabric.

I do think the US should continue to receive some refugees, but it needs to be a much smaller and very carefully monitored program. The current one is a huge mess and a danger to our security and a detriment to our economy and society.

Respectfully,

Michael Sirois

No need for me to say anything further, except maybe to remind readers that S.744 (the Gang of Eight bill in the Senate) provides more funding for resettlement contractors and makes it easier for a greater number and variety of refugees/asylum seekers to gain admission to the US.

About the photo caption:  We wrote about the closure of the IRC Boston office here in 2009.  Visit it!

Washington State reader: 20,000 should be enough

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Editors note:   This is one more in a series of posts on the upcoming, May 15th, US State Department hearing on the “size and scope” of the Refugee Resettlement Program for fiscal year 2014.

For all of our posts and background information on the meeting go to our special category here.

A reader from Washington State shared his views with us after having sent this below to the State Department:

Dear Ms. Spruell,

I am writing to comment on the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for FY 2014.

It is my understanding, backed up by several well-documented sources, that the vast majority (upwards of 90 percent) of the “refugees” resettled under this program have been under no threat of persecution in their home countries, and are simply seeking the economic advantages of living in the U.S.  Once resettled here, they frequently make return trips to their countries of origin, undermining any claim that they their safety or freedom had been in danger.  They (and their financially-motivated sponsors) are taking advantage of the goodwill and naivety of the American people, who believe their country is engaged in helping people whose lives are under serious threat.

Our nation’s entire immigration system has become corrupted by moneyed interests, and is imposing on the American people displacement levels of immigration that they have not asked for and do not want.  We now resettle more than three times the number of refugees as the rest of the industrialized world combined.  Numerous small towns, in states like Maine and Minnesota, have been transformed beyond recognition after being targeted as resettlement locations for Somalis and Ethiopians.  We have been given virtually no say in these decisions, nor even been told by the government what is actually going on.

In reviewing the Refugee Admissions Program for FY 2014, I ask that you:

·        Drastically scale back the total number of refugee admissions granted each year.  A ceiling of 20,000 would still leave us as the leading country of resettlement in the world.

·        Consult with local and state jurisdictions before a community is chosen for resettlement, always giving them the right of refusal.

·        Make clear that resettlement in the U.S. is the option of last resort, with humanitarian efforts focused on helping displaced persons remain in their countries of origin.

Thank you for your attention.

Readers should, from time to time, visit this site where the State Dept. tracks arrivals.  So far this year (6 months into the fiscal year) we had resettled 34,243 refugees which means we will likely have a banner year and surpass 70,000 (the largest number of refugees usually arrive at the end of the fiscal year).  We are also on target for the largest Somali resettlement numbers in recent years.

Virginia man sends testimony to US State Department for hearing next Wednesday

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

If you’ve been following our series of posts on the State Department’s meeting next week to help them determine the size and scope of our refugee resettlement program for FY2014, this is one more in a series of statements that readers have sent to me for publication.  Unfortunately, the deadline for sending testimony was this past Wednesday.   But, heck if you are just seeing this for the first time, send some comments anyway and send a copy to your US Senators and Congressman (instructions here).

Incidentally, anything you send to Congress right now should reference S.744 (The Gang of Eight plus Grover bill), because the bill will provide more refugees and more funding to the federal refugee contractors, here.

Here is the testimony sent this week relating to security screening for refugees.  Mr. Tenney appears to have some experience in the matter of how the Tsarnaev brothers went undetected before their terrorist act on April 15th:

Ms. Anne Richard
Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration
US State Department
Washington, DC. 20520

c/o Delicia Spruell
spruellda@state.gov
Fax (202) 453-9393.

Reference Federal Register Public Notice 8241

Dear Ms. Anne Richard,

I am writing to submit written comments on the President’s FY 2014 U.S. Refugee Admissions Program as part of the upcoming May 15 public hearing in Washington, DC. Sadly, the refugee and asylum resettlement programs have become overtly corrupt and harmful to America.

Please accept my comment against further refugee and asylum cases because the US security services are unable to handle even the existing load.  Some limitations, in my opinion, of the US security services are pointed out below.

1. US security personnel are often unable to repeat foreign or historical names in an interview
when they are told to them.

2. US security personnel have a limited number of foreign names they know.  Even names such as Boris Berezovsky they don’t know.

3. US security personnel can not understand legal cases relating to a foreign country such as US v. Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.

4. US security personnel do not understand the IMF and don’t understand its role or resentments to it
in Russia or Chechnya or in many other countries.  US security personnel do not understand that the IMF is often
blamed in countries for austerity policies.  Anything the IMF does they blame on the US.

5. They do not understand in practice that in foreign countries such as Chechnya and Russia, the people
consider police, prosecutors to be part of rigging cases to protect government.

6. They do not understand that foreigners carry this attitudes over to the US.

7. They do not understand that foreigners have crossed a mental threshold in their
own country of killing or being killed based on identity not whether a person from another group
is a potential ally.

8. They don’t know about the 1999 apartment bombing case in Moscow or that Chechens view that
case as rigged with police, prosecutors involved in rigging it.  They don’t know this
attitude carries over to the US.

9. They do not follow high profile legal cases in Moscow and can’t relate those to Chechens.

10. They do not have a basic knowledge of high profile events in Russia in 1990s.

11. They can’t relate Russian history in 1990s to IMF loans to First and Second Chechen wars.

12. They can’t understand Chechen resentments towards US for support of Russia in second Chechen war
as Chechens see it.

13. They are not aware of Dzhokhar Dudayev or that he was born on April 15, 1944 and that April 15, 2013 Boston
Marathon was on anniversary.  The Wiki article on Dudayev was not corrected on the birth date of Dudayev
until several days after the bombing, as seen from the history.

14. They take what they are told at face value because they lack the domain knowledge to challenge it
or even discuss it.

15. They are reduced to trying to push or provoke a person to see how they react.

16. Security personnel can become frustrated by their lack of knowledge and inability
to learn the relevant history and names. This leads to them giving up even trying
to do their job.

17. Security personnel are not familiar with historical cases such as Klaus Fuchs, Rosenbergs, etc.
and unable to relate what Russia does today to what they did then.

18. Security personnel do not correlate common plan or method evidence
for Russian actions in past cases to their actions today.

19. Security personnel do not understand or have an interest in the
cooperation between the Russian intelligence service and professors at
Russian universities or Russian profs in US, even ones with joint appointments
in Russia and US simultaneously. These professors often have a deep and extensive
knowledge of US institutions and individuals that is valuable to the Russian
intelligence service.  Cooperation between US profs and US security services
is no where as extensive or as deep, and is close to non-existent.

20. US Security personnel are unable to interpret warnings from the Russian government
in light of a knowledge of history in Russia during the last 20 years, or Russia’s
relation to IMF, to Chechen wars or to professors at MIT and Harvard involved
in these events or from Russia.

21. US Security personnel are unable to learn basic information on the links
of Russian government officials, financial firms, academics, IMF and World Bank to each
other or to Chechen history in the last 20 years.

22. US Security personnel are no where near as well informed as Matt Taibbi about Russia and have
no feel for the Russian pulse as indicated in publications like eXile.ru.

23. US security personnel typically do not have community library cards at
local universities and do not use them to gain basic education in these countries.

24. Nor do US security personnel even see why they should.

25. If the rate of violence increased in the US, the security personnel would be
at almost zero learning curve to understand the groups here, their relation
to their home country government, and who in the US they resent and why they would
target them.  This includes former US government employees, IMF and World Bank employees
current or past, corporate current or past, and academics.

26. In fact, even current US government employees outside of the security departments
would not receive protection or even the comprehension by the security services
of why particular US government employees would be targets based on resentments
from these countries.

27. The low level of understanding of security personnel forces in US of
these countries, their history, and of the American institutions role in them and
resentments arising from this mean that they are completely unable to do any
threat assessment or protection of current or former US government officials
who may be the target of resentments of people from such countries.

28. Because of their low level of understanding, lack of knowledge of names,
and of history, if there was a rise in such incidents, the security personnel
would not be able to learn or advance up the learning curve to even do threat assessment
of specific employees of the US government, past or present, who might be targets
of foreign individuals or groups in the US because of the current or past actions
of US government, institutions such as IMF and World Bank, or of US corporations.

29. Moreover, the security personnel see no reason why they should even learn
this. If they have tried to learn it they have given up.

30. There is no effective institutional concept in the security services to make such learning
part of their job. there is no high stakes testing for security personnel, simply
an apathy to this aspect of their work.

31. US security personnel are unable to conduct effect interviews of people such
as Tsarnaev because of the ignorance and apathy of the US security personnel to
these countries, their history, their interaction with rivals such as Russia and China,
and their resentments towards US institutions and individuals arising from this.

32. US security personnel believe they can substitute just looking at a person
or facial expressions for knowledge of the people, history and relationships of a country.

33. US security personnel will substitute trying to challenge a person to see
if they react with hostility or fly off the handle. if they don’t, they pass.
US security personnel lack the knowledge to engage the person in a substantive
discussion of their country, its history, its relation to US, to US institutions,
to international institutions such as IMF and World Bank, or to US banks or corporations.

34. US security personnel do not believe they need such knowledge to interview
suspects but can rely solely on street smarts or interview skills completely absent
of any knowledge of these matters.  This results in failure for interviews by
us security personnel because of this overconfidence in their interview skills and
complete apathy to learning substantial matters that are the basis of the actions
of people coming to the US.

35. Thus even when a foreign country like Russia tips the US security personnel
to a person like Tamerlan Tsarnaev, they lack the knowledge or interest to engage
the person on the history of their country, their beefs with America, their resentments,
or who specifically in the US may be linked to such resentments and thus a potential
target. this includes an inability to protect current or former US government personnel,
or those of international institutions such as IMF and World Bank, private US corporations,
banks, academics or others.

36 Even after an incident occurs, US security personnel are unable to understand
that their overconfidence in their interview skills and lack of basic knowledge
of the country and its interactions with the US led to their failed threat assessments
and past investigative failures.

37. Because US security personnel lack an awareness of this connection and in
fact demonstrate total apathy to such awareness, they are unable to remedy their
lack of basic knowledge.

38. US security personnel after an incident simply believe their street smarts and
interview skills will lead them to avoid a failure in the future without their
ever being aware their prior interviews failed because of their lack of basic
knowledge of the country and its interactions with the US.

39. Thus US security personnel manifest no awareness of their need to learn
the history of Russia and Chechnya in the 1990s, or to understand the role
of IMF loans in funding the Chechen wars as seen by Chechens or resentments
towards those in the US involved in any of this.

40. If the violent incidents increased, the US security personnel lack the basic
awareness of their limitations to even adjust.  They simply accept whatever
violence does happen as inevitable and do not see any link between their
lack of basic knowledge and apathy to their failures in preventing these incidents
or their ability to extend protection to current or past US government employees with
roles towards those countries who may be targets of resentment or to international
institutions such as IMF and World Bank or private corporations or individuals.

41. US security personnel rely on dynamics of interviews not substantive knowledge
to assess who is a threat.  So for example in the classic buddy interview style,
the lead person engages the suspect. The sidekick is not involved and then manifests
occasionally more antagonistic questions as they are not the focus of attention
of the suspect or lead interviewer.  If the suspect is trained in this or
from a country with a natural affinity for chatting up those in authority, they
will not become offended and will instead engage the sidekick in a positive manner.
The result is that the person passes the interview because they pass the
psychodynamics of the buddy interview system.

42. This is the entire extent of the ability of the security services
to interview suspects.  This dynamic is what they rely on. For people from
countries where they deal with government authority and learn to chat them up
and be friendly despite such antagonism they automatically pass the interview
and thus are assessed as not a threat.

43. US security personnel can’t win an interview with a suspect who doesn’t react
to being pushed, because they lack substantive knowledge of the person’s country,
history, institutions and their relation to those of the US or international
organizations with offices here.

44. The US security  bubble was exposed in Boston.  The US security system is
a theatrical system at airports or put on display in the city shutdown.  It has
no substance.  The apathy that pervades it and the smug overconfidence in their
street smarts and interview skills and techniques means it will continue to
fail. They don’t understand the people or the countries which is why their interviews
fail.

45. As the foreign influx accumulates, what happened in Boston in a week in April 2013
can become the new normal.  The security services will simply accept that and never
realize their own faults are to blame and need correction.

46. These attitudes and characteristics arise from the excessive workload for the US
security services.  They do not have time to learn or understand. Thus they have to
fall back on just interview skills and street smarts.  Because this is the only tool
they have, they come to believe it works, even when it fails.  This is the pattern
in the Boston Marathon bombings.  This pattern of apathy to the substantive knowledge
of people and their countries and their interaction with those in the US is already
the new normal.

Although a few elite US security personnel may not be as subject to the criticisms
given, this is likely typical of many if not most. Moreover, any expansion in a crisis
would involve those even worse.      The State Department may interact with a few elite
security personnel who give them a mistaken impression of the sophistication of US
security personnel.  The security personnel who actually interact with suspects
like the Tsarnaevs are not anywhere near this level.

These views represent my opinions only and not those of any organization.

Sincerely yours,

Mark S. Tenney

CC

Honorable James Moran
2252 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4376
Fax: (202) 225-0017

Honorable Mark Warner
475 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-2023
Fax: 202-224-6295

Honorable Tim Kaine
B40C Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4024
Fax: (202) 228-6363

US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510.

House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
2138 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515, p/202-225-3951.

Readers, it is important to send your testimony to your elected representatives, and I promised to publish statements here at RRW as well because the State Department will be putting these in a drawer somewhere in hopes they never see the light of day.   They will  however distribute copies of your testimony (if you have given approval) at the hearing on Wednesday, but only those at the meeting will get them.

Minnesota will be heard at the State Department refugee hearing next Wednesday

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Minnesota resident:  “Why in the world would you import this very dangerous ideology called Islam?”

Readers!  You have a little more than two hours (it is just about 2:40 Eastern time) to take your one opportunity to tell the US State Department what you think they should do in fiscal year 2014—how many refugees will be coming to your town and from where?

We have heard from Texas, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Montana, Maryland, North Carolina and now Minnesota.  See our archives for the hearing here.    (Arizona!  Are you out there? I think I got one from Arizona too, please resend!)

Here then is Debbie Anderson writing from Minneapolis (emphasis mine):

Anne C. Richard
Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration
US State Department
Washington, DC.

May 8, 2013

Re: Federal Register Public Notice 8241

Dear Ms Richard,

I am writing to comment on the President’s FY 2014 U. S. Refugee Admissions Program as part of the upcoming May 15 public hearing to be held in Washington, DC.

‘Refugee Resettlement’ that was once promoted by politicians as an honorable humanitarian effort has degenerated into a very expensive, corrupt industry that seems to serve only those who are enriched by it – politically and/or financially.  Plus, this program is destroying the fabric of American society, helping to bankrupt the country, and is endangering our citizens and our national security.

MN has received so many Somali ‘refugees’ that Minneapolis is aka ‘Little Mogadishu’.  Hardly a compliment considering their decades of civil war and their Islamic hatred for America.  Who can forget the pictures of the rabid, cheering crowds dragging our dead sons through their dusty streets?!

The large influx of Muslim ‘refugees’ has greatly empowered notorious groups such as CAIR-MN, MAS-MN, ISNA-MN – groups with well-documented links to terrorism – that are working hard to change MN into another sharia compliant state.  Because of the aggressive efforts by these Muslim groups I am increasingly seeing Minnesota called Minnesotastan.

These ‘refugees’ and their criminal leaders and radical Imams are a direct threat to America’s national security.  I stood on top of the South Tower only four months before Muslims felled them.  How many Americans have to be savagely maimed or killed before this madness is stopped?

Are you not aware of Islam’s 1400 year history of jihad against the ‘infidels’?  Are you not aware of the savage global jihad that is occurring throughout the world today?  Are you not aware of the plight of Western Europe with the aggressive Islamization of their countries?  Why in the world would you import this very dangerous ideology called Islam?

Here are some of the documented consequences of this harmful program called ‘Refugee Resettlement’:

Minnesota Sheriff Reports to Congress on Growing Somalia Muslim Gang Threat Another Indictment Brought to MN Al-Shabaab

Now Muslims have set up child prostitution rings in the U.S.

Feds assist terror-linked CAIR to force mosque on Minn. town

Man from Coon Rapids, MN found guilty of honor-killing his daughter

Suspicion about Flying Imams grows as terror links pile up

The mosqueing of our neighborhoods – Bloomington, MN

Plus, the 36+ mosques in MN have hosted radical Imams such as Siraj Wahhj, Dr Jamal Badawi and Omar Shahin.

As a citizen I am fed up with the staggering costs of this program and I am fed up with overwhelming influx of those who are hostile to Americans and our way of life.  And I am fed up with politicians and kumbaya ‘church’ leaders who are fulfilling their own agendas rather than looking out for the welfare of the American people.

Please stop the immigration of all Muslims.  Islamic ideology is not compatible with the American Constitution.

I ask that all refugee admissions be dramatically cut back to less than 5000 annually.  And, finally, I ask for a citizen review board to oversee this mammoth corrupt industry.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Debbie Anderson
Minneapolis, MN

cc: Congressman Keith Ellison
2244 Rayburn Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-2305

cc: Senator Amy Klobuchar
302 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

cc: Senator Al Franken
309 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

cc: Attention: Senator Amy Klobuchar
US Senate Judiciary Committee
Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

cc: House of Representatives Judiciary Committee
Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security
2138 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515

Go here for instructions on faxing or e-mailing your testimony today!  If you send me testimonies to publish, I’ll post them in the days ahead.

Today’s State Department refugee testimony comes to you from North Carolina

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

But before we get to it, be sure to visit VDARE where Paul Nachman has penned an excellent piece urging readers there  to send in testimony by close of business tomorrow, May 8th.  He has some information from years before I followed this program that I found very enlightening. I think you will too.  Mr. Nachman shared his testimony with us here, yesterday.

Go here for instructions on how to send your comments (and don’t forget to copy them to your elected officials in Washington and you can throw in some state and local officials too for good measure).  Tomorrow is the deadline!  E-mail or fax instructions:

Persons wishing to present written comments should submit them by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, May 8, 2013 via email to spruellda@state.gov or fax (202) 453-9393.

The comments below are from Jon Sobieski of North Carolina (emphasis mine):

North Carolina is in the top ten resettlement states in the US (surprised?).  Type ‘North Carolina’ into our search function for more.

(See previous testimony from Texas, Tennessee, New Hampshire and Montana.  We have an archive here for all posts relating to this meeting.)

Mr. Sobieski wrote to his Senators and included his testimony.  In a P.S. he asks the Senators this question:

PS I would also like to know why the State Dept. has banned any camera or recording devices at their 1 day public comment hearing?  Isn’t that my tax money that is paying for that meeting?  What are they afraid of that they refuse to allow recording at the public hearing?

Readers should know that last year a serious effort was made to get the State Department to allow recording of the meeting but it was denied.  Good question Mr. Sobieski!

Ms. Anne Richard
Asst. Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration
US State Department
Washington, DC. 20520

April 27, 2013

Re: Federal Register Public Notice 8241 Comment Request

Dear Ms Richard:

I am writing to submit written comments on the President’s FY 2014 U.S. Refugee Admissions Program as part of the upcoming May 15 public hearing in Washington, DC. Sadly, the refugee and asylum resettlement programs have become overtly corrupt and harmful to America.   Below I outline only a few examples of the negative effect these programs are having.  For a nation that is broke, why are we financing huge numbers of inassimilable and dependent people into America?  Why do we allow family chain immigration for the initially approved refugee?  While I want to end the refugee and asylum programs due to their corruption and negative effects on communities, that request will likely be denied.  Therefore, I ask that a full scale audit of the performance of refugees and asylum seekers and the NGOs placing them in the US be completed before any further immigration is allowed.  There are so many questions that demand answers.  What percentage of entrants continues to use welfare after 1 year, 2 years, 5 years?  Can we ban Muslim immigration due to the inherent hatred and preaching of violence toward nonbelievers demanded by Islam and its teachings?  If no outright end can be considered, I urge that the government dramatically reduce refugee and asylum entries to less than 3,000 per year total including family resettlement (if family resettlement is not banned outright ).

The following are only a few of the many reasons that refugee and asylum entry must be stopped or drastically curtailed:

1)    The Boston marathon attacks were committed by jihadis allowed into the US as part of family repatriation.  What is more disconcerting is how their parents were able to easily attain asylum.  Just like that.  They were here on tourist visas and through the father’s sister, were able to get asylum status.  Who checked on these people?  Why do asylum seekers get unlimited welfare access?  Forever?  They did not pay a dime into the system and milked it for all it’s worth.  If their homeland was so terrible, why did they go back on ‘tourist’ visits and now live there permanently apparently.  Now we learn the mother was a shoplifter and skipped back to southern Russia to avoid trial for a $1600 theft (shoplifting) at Lord and Taylor’s.  Are they still on welfare?  Are we depositing welfare payments in their bank accounts in Russia?  America is a sucker and the State Dept. is the biggest sucker of all.  What about the hundreds of thousands of Somalis that the State Dept. has imported?  Is the State Dept. even aware of the criminal behavior Somalis are notorious for in Minneapolis?  Entire communities have been destroyed.  They don’t call areas of Minneapolis ‘Little Somalia’ for nothing.  There is truly a perverse agenda at the State Dept. as they bring in more and more inassimilable groups and dump them in American communities. And who pays for this folly?  We do, the struggling taxpayers.

2)    Who audits these NGOs like the IRC, Catholic, Hebrew, and so many others?  Is anyone looking at the long term ramifications of allowing these NGOs to have free reign to import thousands of inassimilable groups and dump them in our towns?  Why do officers of these NGOs make more than the President? David Milliband was just  hired as CEO of one group (International Rescue Committee) with a $430,000 salary!  Over half of their funding is paid by US taxpayers, others are over 90%!  Does anyone care about the citizens who have to deal with these NGOs and the inassimilable people they dump into our communities?

3)    The State Dept. is failing at screening evil asylum seekers, you appear to only be concerned with import quotas and spending all the money the foolish Congress allots to you.  Damn the American citizens.  Who cares about them and their communities?  To me, the State Dept. was right there in Boston helping these Muslim jihadists build and place these bombs so that they could slaughter the infidels they so despise.   Meanwhile, the stealth jihadists collect welfare and laugh at the stupid infidels in the US.  But it is the State Dept’s failures in managing this corrupt program that is the true evil.  It is as if the State Dept.  is a sponsor of terrorism against the American people.

4)    Why are we importing evil and inassimilable groups when we are broke and suffer from high unemployment?  Due to these groups low IQs and extremely low education levels, the only jobs they can get are the same jobs that our own poor and low IQ citizens are fighting for.  On top of that,  these NGOs provide free training and financial incentives to employers to hire these people over our own citizens.  This has to stop.

5)   Why are we financing NGOs?  Aren’t they supposed to be voluntary and charitable enterprises.  Instead, they are BIG BUSINESS feeding at the taxpayer trough.

6)    The refugee program, like all govt programs, started out small with a tightly targeted purpose and benevolent intentions.  Now it is a monster devouring billions of dollars and destroying our communities.  Indeed, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

7)    In conjunction with the above, U.S. admissions policy has become subsumed to the demands of the UNHCR. The UN is not our friend.  We should not allow a foreign agency to dictate policy to the U.S., especially when it causes adverse effects to local, often small, communities in rural areas. We owe the UN nothing, we owe the world nothing.   We should no longer acquiesce to the UN’s demands and sharply and I mean sharply curtail all asylum and refugee admissions.

The State Department should declare a one year moratorium on settlement and take a critical look at how this program has been corrupted and how adversely it is affecting American communities.

To fully understand the corruption and incompetence in America’s refugee and asylum program, I recommend you study at length the rich and insightful Refugee Resettlement Watch website.

Sincerely,

Jon Sobieski

CC:  Senator Richard Burr, Senator Kay Hagen
Representative Mel Watt
Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security
House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security
Additional CCs to Senator Marco Rubio, Senator Lindsay Graham Senator John McCain

For your faxing enjoyment, Mr. Sobieski has included this list of fax numbers for Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.  (you will probably need to put a ‘1’ in front of each number.

Handy numbers to have if you have comments to fax on S. 744 as well!

Sen. Charles Schumer US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-228-3027
Sen. Patrick Leahy US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-224-3479
Sen. Diane Feinstein US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-228-3954
Sen. Dick Durbin US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-228-0400
Sen. Amy Klobuchar US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-228-2186
Sen. Richard Blumenthal US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-224-9673
Sen. Mazie Hirono US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-224-2126
Sen. John Cornyn US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-228-2856
Sen. Chuck Grassley US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-224-6020
Sen. Orrin G.Hatch US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.202-224-6331unsuccessful fax, Hatch office investigating – update: his office gave me his direct email address  senatorhatch@hatch.senate.gov so I could deliver my comments 5/6/13
Sen. Jeff Sessions US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-224-3149
Sen. Jeff Flake US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-228-0515
Sen. TedCruz US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security.US 202-228-0755