{"id":12757,"date":"2016-05-20T10:57:36","date_gmt":"2016-05-20T14:57:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=12757"},"modified":"2018-12-28T13:27:55","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T18:27:55","slug":"michigan-tops-list-of-places-syrian-refugees-call-home","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2016\/05\/20\/michigan-tops-list-of-places-syrian-refugees-call-home\/","title":{"rendered":"Michigan Tops List of Places Syrian Refugees Call Home"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"michigan_map_rotator_675x450\"As a recent Detroit Free Press<\/i><\/a> article points out, Michigan has accepted more Syrian refugees than any other state in the U.S.<\/p>\n

Indeed, the article reveals that the Wolverine State has absorbed 386 Syrian refugees between January 1, 2015 and April 30, 2016.\u00a0 This is eight more than the second highest receiving state, California, who has taken in 378 Syrian refugees over the same period of time.<\/p>\n

The data, which is sourced from the U.S. State Department\u2019s Refugee Processing Center, further reveals that 211 of the 378 have been settled in the last 7 to 8 months, since the fiscal year began on October 1.<\/p>\n

The number of Syrian refugees heading to Michigan is likely to only increase given the Obama administration\u2019s goal of resettling at least <\/i>10,000 this fiscal year, which ends September 30. \u201cWe expect Syrian refugee arrivals to the U.S. to increase steadily throughout the fiscal year,\u201d said State Department spokeswoman Julie Mason to the Detroit Free Press<\/i>.\u00a0\u00a0 Thus far the administration has settled less than 2,000, making it more than 8,000 shy of its target.<\/p>\n

Mason attempted to downplay security concerns regarding the refugees.\u00a0 \u201cRefugees are the most thoroughly screened category of traveler to the United States,\u201d Mason told the news outlet, noting that all applicants are subject to the \u201csame stringent security requirements that apply to all applicants for U.S. refugee resettlement.\u201d<\/p>\n

Mason\u2019s argument, however, is hardly reassuring considering what her colleagues in the intelligence community have been saying.\u00a0 To be sure, it is impossible to apply \u201cthe same\u201d screening standards to Syrian refugees when \u201cthe same\u201d databases and infrastructure simply does not exist in that country.<\/p>\n

For instance, testifying before the Senate Homeland Security Committee last fall, FBI Director James Comey conceded identifying and screening out potential terrorists is problematic. \u201cMy concern there is that there are certain gaps I don\u2019t want to talk about publicly in the data available to us,\u201d he said. Comey\u2019s concerns were echoed by Nicholas Rasmussen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center. \u201cThe intelligence picture we\u2019ve had of this conflict zone isn\u2019t what we\u2019d like it to be\u2026 you can only review against what you have,\u201d Rasmussen told the committee.<\/p>\n

And, more than a year ago, in February 2015, Michael Steinbach, Assistant Director of the FBI\u2019s Counterterrorism Division testified before the House Homeland Security Committee, stating, \u201cThe concern in Syria is that we don\u2019t have systems in place on the ground to collect information to vet…. You\u2019re talking about a country that is a failed state that does not have any infrastructure, so to speak. So all of the dataset, the police, the intel services that normally you would go to seek information doesn’t exist.\u201d<\/p>\n

It doesn\u2019t get much clearer than that\u2014the databases and information to confirm that individuals are who they say they are just simply \u201cdoesn\u2019t exist.\u201d I am sure that will make us all feel safer as the administration continues on its mission to quickly<\/a> (I mean, thoroughly<\/i>) screen an additional 8,000 by summer\u2019s end for admission to a town near you\u2026.