February 7, 2014
In a 2009 internal government audit, it was shown that at least 70% of asylum applications showed signs of fraud, but many of these fraudulent savages were allowed into our once great nation anyway.
From the Washington Times:
The 2009 fraud assessment, obtained by the House Judiciary Committee and reviewed by The Washington Times, suggests a system open to abuse and exploitation at a time when the number of people applying for asylum in the U.S. has skyrocketed, particularly along the southwestern border.
Another report obtained by the committee suggests that the government isn’t detaining most of those who apply for asylum, including those awaiting a final judgment.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte said the documents taint the credibility of the asylum system, which is designed to provide an outlet for foreigners who face real risks of being harmed if they remain in their home countries.
“Asylum fraud undermines the integrity of our immigration system and hurts U.S. taxpayers. Once individuals are granted asylum, they receive immediate access to all major federal welfare programs. Our immigration system should be generous to those persecuted around the globe, but we must also ensure our compassion isn’t being abused by those seeking to game the system,” Mr. Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican, said in a statement to The Times.
“Because our immigration laws are so loosely enforced by the Obama administration, we should not be surprised to see so much fraud in the system,” he said. “President Obama’s continued refusal to enforce our laws on the books encourages more illegal immigration and invites fraud.”[…]
The asylum system has long been a point of pride for the U.S., but also has sparked a feverish debate over just how generous the system should be and what sorts of checks the U.S. government should go through when trying to determine who qualifies.
Applicants are required to prove they face persecution back home — using what is known as a “credible fear” claim — and that they don’t pose a danger to the U.S. They are held during that initial assessment but often are released after that.
On Wednesday, the Obama administration announced changes that would make it easier for those who had tangential involvement with terrorism to win asylum or refugee status.
Under existing law, those who provided “material support” to terrorists are to be denied their claims, but State Department and Homeland Security officials announced a new policy that said the support has to have been significant, and must have occurred outside of normal commercial transactions or family interactions.
How is it possible that anyone in the world who is in danger is the responsibility of the United States in the first place? Surely, most of, if not all, savage non-White countries are filled with all sorts of danger – can we bring them all here? Apparently that is the plan.
And why would we expect that such a program would not be abused? We would rely on the honesty of people who live in their own filth, and are clearly willing to do anything to escape from the hell they have brought down upon themselves?