![]() |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
| The Open Door How Militant Islamic Terrorists Entered and Remained in the United States, 1993-2001 Executive Summary The nation’s response to the horrific attacks of September 11, 2001 has taken many forms, from military action to expanded security measures at airports. As important as these measures are, there is probably no more important tool for preventing future attacks on U.S. soil than the nation’s immigration system because the current terrorist threat comes almost exclusively from individuals who arrive from abroad. The purpose of this study is to examine how foreign terrorists have entered and remained in the country in an effort to identify weaknesses in the system that can then lead to meaningful reforms. Rather than just focus on 9/11, we examine terrorism on U.S. soil over the last decade to provide a more complete picture of the threat. While no immigration system can be completely foolproof, if only some of those involved in a terrorist plot can be stopped by our immigration system, it is possible that whatever conspiracy they are part of could be uncovered. Including the 9/11 hijackers, 48 foreign-born militant Islamic terrorists have been charged, been convicted, pled guilty, or admitted to involvement in terrorism within the United States since 1993. Almost all of these individuals are now thought to be linked to Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda organization. This study focuses on militant Islamic terrorists because the threat they pose dwarfs that from any other terrorists, foreign or domestic. In addition to 9/11, some of the plots examined in the study include the murder of employees outside of CIA headquarters, the first attack on the World Trade Center, a plot to bomb the subway in Brooklyn, plots to bomb New York City landmarks, and the Millennium plot to bomb Los Angeles International Airport. Findings
Violations of immigration laws are very
common among terrorists. Not only were 12 of the 48 terrorists illegal aliens
when they committed their crimes, at least five others had lived in the
country illegally at some point prior to taking part in terrorism. At least
five others had committed significant violations of immigration laws prior to
their taking part. For those that were illegal aliens, most entered legally on
temporary visas and then overstayed. However, some snuck across the northern
border, such as Abdel Hakim Tizegha, who was involved in the Millennium plot.
In addition to overstaying a visa,
terrorists have violated immigration laws in a number of different ways. Some
terrorists have engaged in fraudulent marriages to American citizens, such as
Fadil Abdelgani, who took part in the plot to bomb New York City landmarks,
and Khalid Abu al Dahab, who raised money and helped recruit new members for
al Qaeda from within the United States. Terrorists also violated immigration laws by
providing false information on their applications for permanent residence,
such as Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, who inspired several terrorist plots. Still other terrorists have violated the law
by working illegally in the United States. At least eight terrorists held jobs
for extended periods while living in the country illegally before taking part
in terrorism, including those involved in the 1993 Trade Center attack, the
plot to bomb New York landmarks, and the Millennium plot. A lack of detention space has allowed
several terrorists who had no legal right to be in the country to be released
into the country. For example, Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind of the 1993 World
Trade Center Attack, did not have a visa to enter the country, but he applied
for asylum when he arrived at JFK airport and because of a lack of detention
space he was paroled into the country. Past amnesties for illegal aliens have
facilitated terrorism. Mahmud Abouhalima, a leader of the 1993 Trade Center
bombing, was legalized as a seasonal agricultural worker as part of the 1986
amnesty. Only after he was legalized was he able to travel outside of the
country, including several trips to the Afghanistan/Pakistan border, where he
received the terrorist training he used in the bombing. Past amnesties have not hindered terrorism.
Mohammed Salameh, another conspirator in the 1993 Trade Center bombing,
applied for the same amnesty as Abouhalima and was denied. But, because there
is no mechanism in place to force people who are denied permanent residency to
leave the country, he continued to live and work in the United States
illegally and ultimately took part in the 1993 attack. Several terrorists should probably have been
denied temporary visas because they had characteristics that made it likely
they would overstay their visa and try to live in the United States illegally.
Under Section 214(b) of immigration law, individuals who are young, unmarried,
have little income, or otherwise lack strong attachment to a residence
overseas are to be denied temporary visas. Several of the 9/11 hijackers,
including the plot’s leader Mohammed Atta, fit these criteria. The visa waiver program, which allows
individuals from some countries to visit the United States without a visa, has
been exploited by terrorists. French-born Zacarias Moussaoui, who may have
been the intended 20th hijacker on 9/11, entered the country using the visa
waiver program. Other terrorists such as Ahmed Ajaj, Ramzi Yousef, and Ahmed
Ressam attempted to use false passports from visa waiver countries to enter
the United States. The vast majority of terrorists in the study
(41 of 48) were approved for visas by an American consulate overseas prior to
entering the country. Of the seven who did not have visas, three snuck into
the country and four arrived at a port of entry without a visa. At least two terrorists, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and Ali Mohammed, should have been denied visas because they were on the watch list of suspected terrorists.
Policy Recommendations
For the reforms suggested above to be possible, the overall level of immigration must be reduced for three reasons:
The primary goal of this report is to determine how terrorists have entered and remained in the country over the last decade, and also to identify problems or outright failures in the nation’s immigration system so as to make policy recommendations to correct the problems. We examine terrorists associated with al Qaeda over a 10-year period in order to discern patterns in their operations. Of course, domestic terrorist threats exist, and changes in immigration policy will have no effect on homegrown terrorism, nor will it protect Americans abroad from foreign terrorists. The existence of other threats, however, is no reason not to make every effect to prevent foreign terrorists from entering or remaining in the country. Most importantly, because of its money, organization, international reach, training, fanaticism, desire to obtain weapons of mass destruction, and willingness to inflict maximum death and destruction on civilian and military targets alike, the threat posed by Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda network is fundamentally different from that posed by any other terrorists. It is therefore critically important that we develop immigration policies to deal with this foreign terrorist threat. Persons Included in the Study This report concentrates on the immigration status of Islamist terrorists at the time they committed their crimes. Including the 9/11 hijackers, 48 foreign-born militant Islamic terrorists have been charged, convicted, pled guilty, or have admitted their involvement in terrorism within the United States since 1993. Only individuals who have directed their terrorist activity at the United States and who committed at least some of their crimes on U.S. soil are included in the study. Almost all of the individuals in the study are now thought to be linked in some way to Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda organization. Most of the terrorists included in the report, other than those killed in the 9/11 attacks, have already pled guilty or been convicted for their crimes. ![]() (Click on image to enlarge) Discussion If we are to reduce the chance of another terrorist attack, we must carefully examine how these terrorists entered and remained in the United States in the past, including attacks prior to 9/11. The findings indicate that terrorists have used almost every conceivable means of entering the country. Thus, any set of solutions must address our entire immigration system and not focus on just one part of the system. The Immigration System is Overwhelmed. One of the main problems with the current immigration system is that the INS and State Department are simply overwhelmed by the number of applicants they must process. This fact is not in dispute. The General Accounting Office (GAO) reported in May 2001 that the receipt of new INS applications (for green cards, citizenship, temporary work permits, etc.) has increased 50 percent over the past six years and that the backlog of unresolved applications has quadrupled to nearly four million. The crush of work has created an organizational culture wherein “staff are rewarded for the timely handling of petitions rather than for careful scrutiny of their merits,” in the words of a January 2002 GAO report. The pressure to move things through the system has led to “rampant” and “pervasive” fraud, with one official estimating that 20 to 30 percent of all applications involve fraud. The GAO concludes that “the goal of providing immigration benefits in a timely manner to those who are legally entitled to them may conflict with the goal of preserving the integrity of the legal immigration system.” Things are not much better at the State Department. Assistant Secretary of State Mary Ryan, who is in charge of visa processing, said in an November 2001 interview in the St. Petersburg Times that, “I think consular officers around the world are stretched just about as thin as they can possibly be. We do not have the personnel resources that we need to do the job the way it should be done.” Putting caps on or reducing the caps that exist for foreign students and guestworkers, and cutting permanent immigration back to the spouses and minor children of American citizens, eliminating the visa lottery, and limiting employed-based immigration to only a few highly skilled individuals would be a good start. The only way to give the State Department and the INS the breathing space they need to implement much-needed reforms is to reduce their workload. It is simply not reasonable to expect the INS in particular to deal with a constantly increasing workload, make significant process in the huge backlogs that exist, and at the same time fundamentally restructure and reform itself. The System Does Not Have to Be Foolproof. No set of reforms will catch every terrorist every time, but the reforms outlined above will dramatically increase the chances that at least some of those involved in a large conspiracy, such as the 9/11 attacks, will be caught. This can and has before aided in the uncovering of entire conspiracies. In the case of the Millennium Plot, the apprehension of one terrorist at the border, Ahmed Ressam, caused the entire conspiracy to unravel. Reforming immigration policy can also significantly enhance national security by increasing the chance that terrorists will not be issued a visa in the first place or be able to cross the border illegally. And if they cannot enter the country, they cannot commit terrorist acts on American soil. A Lax Immigration System Simply Cannot Be Allowed to Remain. The current immigration system does not carefully check the backgrounds and vigorously interview all visa applicants. It also does not enforce time limits on temporary visas. Fraudulent applicants for green cards are often approved and those in the country illegally are allowed to work, open bank accounts, and receive drivers licenses. Moreover, the nation’s border remains largely undefended. While such a system does not guarantee that terrorists will continue to enter and remain in the country, it certainly makes it much more likely. Greater scrutiny of visa applicants, closer tracking of the foreign citizens allowed into the country, better enforcement of immigration laws, and adequate policing of the border, coupled with the reduction in immigration that would make these reforms possible, are the kind of reasonable measures that would enhance security without infringing on the rights of Americans. Steven A. Camarota is the Director of
Research at the Center for Immigration Studies. |