US STATE DEPT WHISTLE BLOWER EXPOSES ‘REFUGEE’ PROGRAM


A U.S. State Department retiree veteran has published a whistle blower letter in the Chicago Tribune fingering the refugee resettlement program as fraught with “fraud” and “abuse.”Mary Doetsch said “the problems were apparent before President Obama took office, but got worse under his leadership and that she “fully supports” President Trump’s executive order to temporarily halt the program to improve the vetting process. I fully support President Donald Trump’s executive order that temporarily halts admissions from the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and bans travel from nationals of countries that potentially pose a security risk to the United States; however, I don’t think the action goes far enough. Further, I believe there are many people throughout the country who feel the same way,” she writes.

“After having served in both Republican and Democrat administrations; she refutes the narrative repeated by the Obama State Department. The same false narrative is repeated by its nonprofit contractors at Catholic Charities, Lutheran Social Services, lobbyists and supporters including some members of Congress. The narrative that refugees are the “most vetted” and “most scrutinized” of all travelers to the United States is simply not true.”

Doetsch retired about two months ago. She was a refugee coordinator. She turned  State Dept whistle blower because one of her assignments was at a United Nations refugee camp in Jordan.  This is where she saw the loose way that many of the Syrian refugees were handled. These people are flowing into the U.S. from. She did three tours of duty, in Cairo, Egypt, dealt exclusively with Middle Eastern refugees; in Vienna, Austria, and with African refugees coming in through Malta; and in Cuba.

Her letter affirms what conservatives have been saying for years. It has been widely reported by conservative websites that the “vetting” of refugees from broken countries such as Somalia, Syria and Sudan usually consists of a just personal interview with the refugee. In other words, our vetting system is mostly based on a person interviewing a refugee and believing whatever their gut tells them about this refugee.

This loose vetting is not conclusive enough to determine whether or not someone’s coming into our country to do us harm. Furthermore, the interviewer in many cases is an interpreter from that very same country. In Middle Eastern countries the United States uses people from the same village to vet fellow neighbors.  These countries have no law enforcement data to vet against their personal history.

We just don’t know if the history we are hearing about the refugee is true. In every case the U.S. government doesn’t have a clue about the refugee’s background. Sometimes even their name and identity is fabricated and they have no documentation, such as a valid passport. Sometimes they have fraudulent documentation.

WND reported back in September 2016 that the government was allowing in some refugees whose personal stories could not be verified.

Doetsch writes:

“As a recently retired 25-year veteran of the U.S. Department of State who served almost eight years as a refugee coordinator throughout the Middle East, Africa, Russia and Cuba, I have seen first-hand the abuses and fraud that permeate the refugee program and know about the entrenched interests that fight every effort to implement much-needed reform. Despite claims of enhanced vetting, the reality is that it is virtually impossible to vet an individual who has no type of an official record, particularly in countries compromised by terrorism. U.S. immigration officials simply rely on the person’s often rehearsed and fabricated ‘testimony.’ I have personally seen this on hundreds of occasions.”

In just the first full week day since Judge James Robart struck down Trump’s executive order, more than 100 refugees have been rushed into the country by State Department contractors. Why the rush?

As a refugee coordinator, Doetsch writes:

“I saw the exploitations, inconsistencies and security lapses in the program, and I advocated strongly for change. Nonetheless, during the past decade and specifically under the Obama administration, the Refugee Admissions Program continued to expand blindly, seemingly without concern for security or whether it served the best interests of its own citizens.”

She highlighted the situation of African boat people who arrive on the European island of Malta seeking asylum. These illegal aliens in Malta are magically turned into “refugees” by the United Nations and shipped to the United States. She writes:

“For instance, the legally questionable resettlement of refugees from Malta to the United States grew substantially, despite the fact that as a European country with a functioning asylum system, ‘refugees’ should have remained there under the internationally accepted concept of ‘the country of first asylum.’ Similarly, the ‘special’ in-country refugee programs in Cuba and Russia continue, although they are laden with fraud and far too often simply admit economic migrants rather than actual refugees.

“As an insider who understands its operations, politics and weaknesses, I believe the refugee program must change dramatically and the courts must allow the president to fully implement the order.”

The secrecy and fraudulent nature of the U.S. refugee program is exposed in the new blockbuster investigative work “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad,” a book Michele Bachmann says is the ‘most important read of 2017’.

The United Nations selects refugees sent to the United States. The United Nations stronghold of leadership is mostly from wealthy Middle Eastern countries. In some cases countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, who have refused to take refugees themselves.

This is a problem President Trump and others have indicated needs to be solved, and it needs to be solved immediately. What are your thoughts on this State department whistle blower? Does she have a point?

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.