Thread: Feds can't say whereabouts of those whose visas were revoked over terror threat

Feds can't say whereabouts of those whose visas were revoked over terror threat

Published December 17, 2015 FoxNews.com

FILE: Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP)


The Obama administration cannot be sure of the whereabouts of thousands of foreigners in the U.S. who had their visas revoked over terror concerns and other reasons, a State Department official acknowledged Thursday.

The admission, made at a House oversight hearing examining immigrant vetting in the wake of major terror attacks, drew a sharp rebuke from the committee chairman.

“You don’t have a clue do you?” Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told Michele Thoren Bond, assistant secretary for the Bureau of Consular Affairs.

Bond initially said the U.S. has revoked more than 122,000 visas since 2001, including 9,500 because of the threat of terrorism.

But Chaffetz quickly pried at that stat, pressing the witness about the present location of those individuals.

"I don't know," she said.

The startling admission came as members of the committee pressed administration officials on what safeguards are in place to reduce the risk from would-be extremists.

At issue is how closely the U.S. government examines the background of people seeking entry to the country, including reviews of their social media postings.

Leon Rodriguez, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, told committee members that such checks aren't being done in an abundant manner, and he was not specific about when or how it would occur.

Lawmakers are trying to ascertain which safeguards are in place to ensure that extremists are not exploiting a variety of legal paths to travel to the United States.

One of the San Bernardino, Calif., shooters came to the U.S. on a K-1 fiancee visa last year despite the fact that the FBI believed she was already radicalized.

Tashfeen Malik came to the U.S. on a K-1 fiance visa in July 2014 and passed multiple background checks and at least two in-person interviews, one in Pakistan and another after she married Syed Farook. FBI Director James Comey has said Malik and Farook communicated privately online about jihad and martyrdom before they married.

Lawmakers at times angrily pressed officials on why even public social media wouldn't routinely be looked at for vetting those trying to enter the country.

"If half the employers are doing it in the United States of America, if colleges are doing it for students, why wouldn't Homeland Security do it?" said Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass.

"We don't even look at their public stuff, that's what kills me."

DHS did launch three pilot programs specifically aimed at reviewing social media postings as part of the immigration vetting process.

"There is less there that is actually of screening value than you would expect, at least in small early samples, some things seem more ambiguous than clear," Rodriguez told lawmakers Thursday. He said foreign alphabets frequently used in social media posts were a challenge to translate.

"We all continue to believe there's a potential for there to be information of screening value ... particularly in high risk environments," he added.

Both DHS and the State Department are reviewing the process for vetting visa applications, including the K-1 program, and have been directed by the White House to create specific recommendations for improvements.

DHS is specifically reviewing policies on when authorities at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services can look at social media posts as part of the process for evaluating applications for certain visas.

"There are some legal limits to what we can do," Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said Wednesday. He added that he thinks reviews of social media should be done more often, but did not provide specifics.

During his opening remarks Chaffetz, said: "It is unclear how someone who so openly discussed her hatred of our country and way of life could easily pass three background checks. We need to understand how the breakdown happened with Malik and what we are doing to make sure it doesn't happen again."

Lawmakers have also pressed for changes to the Visa Waiver Program, which allows many citizens from 38 countries to travel to the United States without being subjected to the in-person interview required to receive a visa. Many fear that foreign fighters who carry western passports will be able to exploit that system to travel freely to the United States.

Earlier this month the House voted overwhelmingly to tighten controls on that program and require visas for anyone who has been to Iraq or Syria in the last five years. Security changes to the program were also included in the Senate version of a massive spending bill expected to be approved later this week.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...l?intcmp=hpbt1

Pathetic. Disgusting.

Incompetency on parade.

U.K. Immigration officers give up hunting 10,000 missing asylum seekers

Missing asylum seekers not a priority as second report reveals farcical rules on illegal worker raids

Immigration officers have given up on finding missing asylum seekers Photo: REUTERS

By Tom Whitehead, Security Editor
4:50PM GMT 17 Dec 2015


Immigration officers have given up trying to find more than 10,000 asylum seekers who are missing in Britain, a watchdog has revealed.

Staff are not even checking last known addresses because it is “not a priority” and a “drain on resources”, the chief inspector of borders and immigration found.

Illegal immigrants have also been allowed to abscond after being released from custody because there are no beds available in detention centres.

And more than 30,000 failed asylum seekers are still in the UK more than two years after all appeals against removal were exhausted, the report said.

A Home Office poster campaign to urge people to leave sparked controversy Photo: Rick Findler

David Bolt, the chief inspector, delays in dealing with asylum cases made it more likely they would be able to stay in the UK.

His review of removals found 10,000 asylum cases where the main applicant and dependants, including children, were no longer in contact with the Home Office or had absconded.

• Failed asylum seekers will have 28 days to leave Britain under new plan

But “while immigration enforcement teams could conduct residential visits to attempt to trace absconders they were reluctant to do so as this work was not a priority and was considered a drain on resources”, the report said.

In a sample of 338 cases examined by inspectors, 48 individuals were logged as absconders.

Of these, an attempt to locate the person had been made in only nine instances, including five in which teams visited last known addresses.

As of September last year, there were also 30,406 failed asylum seekers who were still in the UK more than two years after their last appeal against removal had been rejected.

Mr Bolt said: "Failure to deal with asylum cases in a timely manner was inefficient as well as ineffective.

"The more time an asylum case took to resolve, the more likely barriers to removal would arise from the formation of relationships, the birth of children and other community ties.

"It also meant individuals were left not knowing if or when the Home Office might take action to remove them."

Scanner picks up migrants hiding in a lorry Photo: EPA

Staff at sites which some immigrants are required to attend periodically said their resources have become increasingly stretched due to the number of individuals on reporting regimes, which stood at 47,000 last December.

The report said: "Managers said that the numbers reporting placed pressure on back office administrative functions, such as taking action against individuals who had failed to report."

• 'Half empty' private jets used to carry failed asylum seekers home

It added that limited bed space in detention centres meant some individuals who had repeatedly failed to abide by the rules were not pursued or detained because they did not fit "priority categories", with some of those later absconding.

The inquiry identified a "disconnect" between the work of different departments, saying poor communication was having an "adverse impact on efficiency and effectiveness".

However, the report said increases in the numbers of voluntary departures suggested the Home Office's focus on this area was having an impact.

In a separate report from Mr Bolt, it emerged immigration officers are not allowed to chase suspected illegal workers if they run off during a raid.

Enforcement teams are also powerless if additional suspects discovered on premises refuse to answer questions and want to leave.

Staff have been ignoring the Home Office guidelines in order to detain suspected illegal immigrants but a watchdog has warned it could mean suspects were held illegally.

Guidance states that enforcement officers raiding business premises cannot pursue anyone leaving the building unless they are aware of their immigration status.

“In six cases we found that officers had failed to comply with this guidance and had given chase in an effort to apprehend the individuals, raising issues about unlawful detention and/or arrest and officer safety,” the report said.

If other suspects are found other than a “named offender”, staff can only ask “consensual questions” to try and discover their immigration status.

“But should a person seek to exercise their right not to answer questions and leave, there is no power to arrest that person purely on suspicion of committing an immigration offence,” it said.

The report revealed that the focus of immigration visits has shifted away from enforcement raids to “educational visits” to encourage employers not to hire illegal staff.

It also found that intelligence about illegal working mostly consisted of "low-level allegations" by members of the public.

Home Office spokesman said: "We expect people with no right to be here to leave the country voluntarily — and we offer help for them to do this – but where they do not, we will enforce their departure."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...m-seekers.html