Representative Stephen Lynch (D-Massachusetts) points up an appalling weakness in the Homeland Security Department that won’t be fixed by the firing of these 72 employees and the resignation of the director (which director he is referring to is unclear; the DHS Secretary certainly didn’t resign). The entire culture of the Department, and the Washington establishment, needs to be changed, such that there is not a remote possibility of people who are on a terrorist watchlist getting hired at DHS. But no adequate screening procedures are in place, because they would be “Islamophobic.”
“Congressman Lynch: 72 Department of Homeland Security Employees On Terrorist Watchlist,” by Tori Bedford, WGBH, December 1, 2015:
Earlier this month, 47 democrats in the house of representatives defied a house veto threat by backing a GOP bill to ramp up screening requirements for Syrian and Iraqi refugees. Congressman Stephen Lynch was among them. He joined Jim Braude and Margery Eagan on Boston Public Radio to discuss the reasoning behind his vote and other congressional matters.
Questions are paraphrased, and responses are edited where noted […].
MARGERY: Let’s start with the vote on the Syrian refugees. Why were you with those 47 other democrats?
It’s a very simple bill, I know that it’s got subsumed within a larger discussion about immigration policy, but basically, the bill we voted on was a very short bill—four pages in length, basically, and it said that the director of national security shall review the vetting process as being conducted by both the FBI and the department of homeland security. Because of the disastrous results we’ve had so far with the screening process, especially the department of homeland security, I think it was a very good idea to have another set of eyeballs looking at that process.
Back in August, we did an investigation—the inspector General did—of the Department of Homeland Security, and they had 72 individuals that were on the terrorist watch list that were actually working at the Department of Homeland Security. The director had to resign because of that. Then we went further and did and eight-airport investigation. We had staffers go into eight different airports to test the department of homeland security screening process at major airports. They had a 95 percent failure rate. We had folks—this was a testing exercise, so we had folks going in there with guns on their ankles, and other weapons on their persons, and there was a 95 percent failure rate.
I have very low confidence based on empirical data that we’ve got on the Department of Homeland Security. I think we desperately need another set of eyeballs looking at the vetting process. That’s vetting that’s being done at major airports where we have a stationary person coming through a facility, and we’re failing 95 percent of the time. I have even lower confidence that they can conduct the vetting process in places like Jordan, or Belize or on the Syrian border, or in Cairo, or Beirut in any better fashion, especially given the huge volume of applicants we’ve had seeking refugee status.
JIM: Even if you’re right that the system needs strengthening, the most likely way that a terrorist would come into this country is not through an 18-24 month-long process, but through this Visa program that allows 20 million people from 38 countries to come here every single year with absolutely no prior approval at all.
We had Democratic and Republican proposals on this bill, and there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two of them. It became a sort of a proxy battle over immigration. You had a bunch of Republican governors who were using it politically, and saying, “we’re going to stop refugees from coming into our state, which is baloney because they have no ability—zero ability—under the constitution to actually prevent refugees from coming into their state. You also had other people on the far left saying that this would stop every person from coming into the United States. In both cases, if they only took the time to read the bill, they would see that it did not do either. The democratic proposal also requires a multi-layered vetting process of refugees.
The reason the refugee issue came up and not the Visa waiver program is because in the Paris example, you had somebody go into the stream of legitimate refugees and then perpetrate acts of violence upon the civilians in Paris. That’s why that example came to the forefront.
I agree with you—I think the Visa waiver program, where you’ve got 20 million people coming in, versus the [refugees] coming in, 10,000? perhaps? At the end of the day, obviously the Visa waiver program is the one that we should be looking at….

RichardL says
the problem with the whole situation is that even normal people are completely confused when it comes to islam: the enemy (terror suspects) are working for the terror watchdog. If reality is so absurd that it beggars description and defies explanation, how should normal people even begin to understand it?
It is like Gestapo men with swastika armbands doing the border control in New York 1944.
quotha raven says
To RichardL, who sez “…even normal people are completely confused when it comes to islam: the enemy (terror suspects) are working for the terror watchdog.”
Nothing confusing here, Richard; we are just competing in the appalling stupidity category with France, who’ve got 57 workers on a terrorist list working at the airport…non?
I’m a normal person, and since seeing governments Through the Looking Glass, I’m not confused at all…
Cheers!
Quotha Raven
Tuscany says
Seems like you’re confused..Here is a better understanding of muslims to help you understand muslims. Radicals will cut off your head while moderates (your peaceful muslims) hold your feet
Baucent says
“they had 72 individuals that were on the terrorist watch list that were actually working at the Department of Homeland Security.”
Now before you Islamophobes explode, this is all perfectly logical. If you are not permitted to name the threat, then you will not probe associations and beliefs of applicants. Therefore, it is of no relevance what the religion of the applicant might be. I would surmise that HR folks at the DHS were told not to seek information on whether an applicant was on a terror watch list as that probably violated their civil rights, or something along those lines. Willful ignorance is bliss.
Shane says
Obama and his administration view the threat as “violent extremism” and those mostly likely to be violent extremists in their view are White conservative Christians who oppose gay marriage and abortion and who do not believe in climate change.
Dave says
Jim Braude and Margery Eagan show on WGBH is an extreme left wing progressive public radio show. The fact that they are even discussing this issue is a plus. Its also a plus that Congressman Lynch a Democrat and my representative is highlighting this issue. He is a former steel workers union member and he does the little things like responding to his constituents with actual letters. Every once in awhile he shows some promise of getting off of the democratic plantation (he voted against Obamacare), but then party politics take over and he will do something like endorse Hillary.
gravenimage says
Jim Braude and Margery Eagan show on WGBH is an extreme left wing progressive public radio show. The fact that they are even discussing this issue is a plus.
…………………..
Agreed, Dave. Good to see this.
Angemon says
Fox, henhouse, etc.
traci94 says
Definitely. I want to know more about this statement; how in the heck did 72 people on the terrorist watch list get a job at Homeland Security?
Joseph says
Exactly!!!!! As a patriotic American I am willing to bet $1000.00 that I wouldn’t survive the background check.
Joseph says
Revelation 13:17
And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Looks like it will be for jobs too.
Jay Boo says
“…they had 72 individuals that were on the terrorist watch list that were actually working at the Department of Homeland Security. The director had to resign because of that.
———————————————-
The MSM will say, “problem solved” and congratulate the Obama administration’s alleged ‘competence’ at rooting them out.
Myxlplik says
More than likely they were all recommended, or put into place by policies schemed up for Obama by his Muslim Brotherhood advisors.
How this man hasn’t been tried for treason yet is beyond me, but I’m just a simple guy.
Edward says
“The entire culture of the Department, and the Washington establishment, needs to be changed, such that there is not a remote possibility of people who are on a terrorist watchlist getting hired at DHS. But no adequate screening procedures are in place, because they would be Islamophobic.”
To keep America a sovereign nation…… the Islamophobic mania has to be ditched now!
It’s the most prudent thing to do! You wouldn’t let a TB or an HIV infected surgeon
operate on you, right!
prudent >careful in providing for the future; providence >ethical a God given right.
gravenimage says
Congressman: 72 DHS employees on terrorist watchlist
…………………..
Fox, hen house.
pennant8 says
The HQ of the DHS is located at the intersection Of Massachusetts and Nebraska Avenues in Washington. During WWII that facility was operated by the Navy and was the American counterpart to the UK’s Bletchley Park. The two facilities worked hand in hand in breaking the German Enigma codes and the Japanese Naval codes know as JN-25. It saddens me to no end that this once proud facility is now the home of the insultingly named Department of Homeland Security.
BogdanEu says
72 DHS fired, 72 virgins.This is Obama’s inner circle doing!
Matthieu Baudin says
The ‘Inclusive Agenda’ or ‘P.C. Agenda’ or ‘Post Modern Agenda’ or whatever label you select may effectively White Ant the intelligence and security apparatus. Perhaps the old democracies will not go out with a bang or a whimper but will just dissolve away through negligent or wilful porosity.
Notta says
Thank you for the (Aussie) terminology of “White_Ant”. It took a little digging to find its definition (termite damage), but it is certainly an accurate description of an age-old political process of destruction from within with “no” externally_visible signs until it is too late and the structure (institution) collapses into its beyond_repair “foundation”. You, I, Robert, Brigitte, Pamela, and many others are clear on it. Be sure to compliment and support those performing “termite control”, and let’s pray that the “queens” like BO have not laid so many eggs that the process will complete despite our best efforts to preserve the valuable concepts espoused in “THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT”.
Brenda says
If you see something, say something…..
LisaLisa says
Obviously it is in everyone in this nations best interest to vote out a democrat president in the near future. I strongly believe only a strong republican president will have the will to have the government investigated and weeded out. I have a high regard for any and all members of congress who put their foot down to stop this insanity. BUT as Obama has said he will not stop them from crossing the border. I feel it is time to ramp up border security. Who knows how many have passed through????
Ty Whalin says
One of the problem’s is the fact that the government’s can right all the bills they want to write, but unless the laws, rule’s, regulations are properly governed then it doesn’t matter much that the government’s right all these bills etc…