|     |     |  About Us   |   Archives   |   Contact Us |

Sign up for Security Debrief Newsletters



Archive for November, 2007

« Older Entries

Holy Land Mistrial: Judging a Designated Terrorist Entity

Thursday, November 29th, 2007

By Matthew Levitt, Guest Contributor

Recently, the Palestinian Authority (PA) shut down several Islamic charity committees in the West Bank, stating that Hamas was using them as a means to transfer funds to the group’s activists there. Meanwhile, on October 22, the U.S. federal trial of the Dallas-based Holy Land Foundation (HLF) and several of its officers — accused of financing Hamas (a U.S.-designated terrorist group) by funding some of these same charities — ended in mistrial.

The defendants and their supporters immediately trumpeted the verdict, claiming their innocence and arguing that the foundation’s 2001 terrorist designation must be similarly flawed. Many other critics have also pounced on the outcome, charging the government with overreaching in a manner similar to other “failed” terrorism financing prosecutions. Although the mistrial was a major setback for the government, it was hardly the victory depicted by the defendants (who all remain under a standing indictment and are likely to be retried), and it will not affect Washington’s previous blacklisting of the foundation.

Designation Process

The U.S. designation of HLF as a terrorist entity in 2001 was based on a significant body of evidence — some classified, some public — that the foundation supported Hamas. Such designations are the product of a robust interagency process that considers strength of evidence, diplomatic concerns, and many other factors. The evidentiary record produced to support a designation then undergoes several rounds of review by lawyers representing various U.S. departments. Although several designations have been challenged in court, not one has been overturned.

The Treasury Department produced the evidence against HLF in a seven-volume, 3,130-page, exhaustively reviewed administrative record. When this record was challenged in court, a federal district judge determined — and an appellate court later affirmed — that the evidence “provides substantial support for [Treasury's] determination that HLF acts for or on behalf of Hamas.”

HLF made use of the ample opportunities to challenge the designation and submit material in its defense. According to the U.S. district court for Washington, D.C., the Treasury Department included in the record “a significant portion of HLF’s evidence challenging [Treasury's] factual determination.” The court also noted that HLF “was afforded an opportunity to submit further evidence to [Treasury], but failed to do so.” In other words, whatever the final verdict in its criminal trial, HLF’s terrorist designation stands on its own merits.

Defending a Mixed Prosecution Record

In charging that the HLF case was only the latest example of the government’s overreaching, critics have also distorted the government’s record in prosecuting terrorism financing cases. For example, in 2005, Sami al-Arian was in fact acquitted on most charges in a similar case in Tampa, Florida. Yet, he then pled guilty to conspiracy in providing funds or services to Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Similarly, two men charged with financing Hamas were acquitted in a Chicago case earlier this year, but were convicted on lesser terrorism-related charges. Abdulhalim Ashqar, who was convicted of obstruction of justice and criminal contempt, was sentenced last week to 135 months in prison and a $5,000 fine. The judge arrived at the sentence by applying sentencing guidelines in conjunction with the evidence that showed Ashqar’s activities for, and knowledge of, Hamas. And in July, the other defendant in that case, Muhammad Salah, was sentenced to twenty-one months in prison for lying under oath in a civil trial concerning the murder of an American teenager in Israel by Hamas terrorists.

Other cases have been more successful. For example, Muhammad Shorbagi, a Georgia man who served as the local HLF representative, pled guilty and was sentenced to seven years in prison earlier this year for providing material support to Hamas through HLF. According to the Justice Department, Shorbagi “knew that some or all of the money was, in fact, destined for Hamas . . . in part because he was a Georgia representative for HLF and [had] attended HLF meetings at which high-level Hamas officials made presentations condemning Israel,” and also because he “had hosted high-level Hamas officials at a Georgia mosque where he served as Imam.”

Still, these cases clearly demonstrate the difficulties prosecutors face in attempting to convict individuals who provide material support to terrorist groups under the cover of humanitarian or political activity. Supporters do not simply write checks out to “Hamas,” and it is extremely difficult to trace an American dollar to a terrorist’s bomb. Fortunately, U.S. law does not require prosecutors to draw a definitive line between funds raised in the United States and buses blown up abroad — giving money to any part of a designated terrorist organization is illegal.

HLF’s Proven Ties to Hamas

In the HLF trial, defense lawyers argued that the government must designate each and every component of a “foreign terrorist organization” — such as the Hamas-run charity committees in the West Bank and Gaza — before funding them can be deemed illegal. But this should not be the case. Donors and charities have an obligation to ensure that they are not funding entities tied to designated terrorist organizations. The Holy Land Foundation funded charities publicly tied to Hamas by the PA, the Israeli government, the U.S. government, and even by senior Hamas leaders themselves.

Indeed, evidence presented at the HLF trial revealed that the foundation’s leadership was well aware it was funding Hamas charities. For example, a 1991 report sent by an unindicted co-conspirator to HLF’s chief executive officer, Shukri Abu Baker, specifically listed charity committees controlled by Hamas: Ramallah Zakat and the Islamic Charitable Society of Hebron were described with the phrase “All of it is ours”; the Jenin and Qalqiliya Zakat committees were noted as “guaranteed.” Later, at a 1993 meeting featuring HLF officials, Muin Shabib, a member of Hamas’s terrorist Qassam Brigades, categorized the institutions tied to Hamas as educational, social, charitable, cultural, medical, and religious. He then proceeded to name specific charities and organizations that he described as “our institutions.” At the top of the list was “The Islamic Complex,” a well-known Hamas institution funded by HLF.

Conclusion

Without a doubt, terrorism financing cases are difficult to prosecute. But the failure of the Dallas jury to reach a decision on HLF the first time around is no exoneration — it is simply an initial setback in an ongoing case. The prospect of a retrial should make the defendants very nervous, given the extensive evidence indicating that the foundation’s leadership was well aware it was funding Hamas charities. And whatever the outcome of the next round of court proceedings, the foundation’s terrorist designation will continue to stand.

Matthew Levitt is special guest to Security DeBrief. He is a senior fellow and director of the Stein Program on Terrorism, Intelligence, and Policy at The Washington Institute. A former deputy assistant secretary for intelligence and analysis at the Treasury Department, he is author of Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad (Yale, 2006).  His blog posting is also found at the Washington Institute. 

Posted in Intelligence | Comments

Too Careful of Approriate Force – Lessons for Minneapolis & Denver

Wednesday, November 28th, 2007

Public Order operations, such as those currently challenging the French police in suburbs ofutside of Paris, are about the pro-active policing of order. Their goal is to gather intelligence and work through liasions to shape both the ground and community relations and prevent escalation of violence. This requires hard work by the community, the police and politicians alike. Especially as matters come to a head, clear and positive actions by the police are essential.  If violence does occur, then it must be dealt with in an appropriate and professional manner. 

In attempting to maintain a low level of escalation, the French police have increased the risk to their officers.  The expectation has been set that shotgun attacks will be tolerated, and so 30 such incidents have now occurred over the past few nights.  The French police will eventually meet such lethal force with their own.  There will undoubtedly be an outcry, similar to the public outrage that faced the police and military in Northern Ireland some years ago when a loyalist protester barricaded himself in a gunshot-resistant wooden sangar and fired crossbow bolts at members of the British Army baseline.  Unsurprisingly, the Commanding Officer of the battalion under fire (recently returned from Iraq) rightly classified this as use of lethal force and instructed his overwatch team (lethal cover for the non-lethally focused Public Order troops) to neutralise the threat.  Later, the individual was arrested for attempted murder. 

Public Order operations commanders have as much responsibility to their officers as to the crowd.  When lethal force is used against them, a rubicon has been crossed. The offending individuals must be identified and neutralised to send a signal that such behaviour cannot be tolerated.  The argument may be made that the precipitous use of lethal force may escalate the situation further, which is fair. However, police must still have the tactical freedom, and the capability, to engage with lethal force in response to a clearly identified threat.

There are lessons to be learnt in preparation for the Republican and Democratic National Conventions next year.  It is highly likely that anti-war and G8-style protestors will disrupt at least one if not both of the conventions.  The former are generally not particularly organised nor violent, but this might change as frustrations about the Iraq War continue to mount.  G8 protestors, on the other hand, represent the Ivy League of protestors: organised, effective, and much better trained and rehearsed than an average police department’s public order capability.  These departments must ensure that they have the appropriate decision-making, command and control, training and use of force processes identified and trained early. It is essential to clearly address the hypothetical ‘what if’s’ to prevent being caught unprepared when a situation arises.  Organised and planned rioting can destroy the reputation of both a city and its police officers - a phenomenon seen this and last decade in the United States. 

If they haven’t done so already, Minneapolis and Denver should start looking to create appropriate threat response capabilities.

Posted in Emergency Preparedness & Response, Law Enforcement | Comments

Homeland Security or Wildlife Security – Chertoff Decides

Tuesday, November 27th, 2007

With all due respect to our friends championing the green cause and saving our planet, it sometimes seems as though their fight treats other, equally worthy issues too dismissively. Take, for example, this new lawsuit brought against DHS Secretary Chertoff. The complaint alleges that the REAL ID act is unconstitutional because it gives the secretary the authority to void any law that would impede construction of a border fence. Defenders of Wildlife filed this suit after Chertoff voided laws that would force an environmental impact survey of plans to build the fence across the San Pedro River. They argue that striking a law is the same as changing it, which thereby violates the principle of separation of powers.

Protecting the earth is a noble cause, but making flowers and bushes a higher priority than the American people and the American economy strongly challenges basic common sense. According to Chertoff, some 20,000 undocumented persons crossed illegally through the San Pedro Riparian Natural Conservation Area last year. They left behind trash, human waste and abandoned vehicles, and also introduced parasites to the area’s aquifer. This is the cost of not having a secure border. Though the fence is understandably not the greatest solution to this problem, it is the one that Congress mandated by law, and Secretary Chertoff is only doing his job by ensuring that it gets built timely and properly.

Read more about the REAL ID Act here.

Posted in Border Security, Congress, Politics & PR, Immigration & Visa Policy | Comments

We Must Remain Vigilant

Sunday, November 25th, 2007

The further we move away from 9-11, the more inclined we are to let our guard down. As we learned in the attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 and again in 2001, Al Qaeda knows that time is on their side. The fact that there has not been a significant terrorist attack in the United States since 9-11 doesn’t dismiss the fact that we are in a war against extremists who are intent on attacking us.

So why is there so much concern with training firefighters in major cities to take on a new role as lookouts for terrorist activity? The Department of Homeland Security is testing a program with the New York City Fire Department to share intelligence so firefighters are better prepared when they respond to emergency calls. DHS trains FDNY personnel in how to identify material and/or behavior that may indicate terrorist activity. When entering a location, the firefighters are instructed to be alert for hostile, uncooperative and resistant behavior; chemicals or materials that seem out of place; surveillance equipment; little or no furniture; and other signs that could indicate a terrorist hideout.

“Broadly speaking, firefighters with their responsibilities can provide key information as they operate,” a spokesman for the FDNY stated in confirming their participation in the training. If the program is successful, DHS intends on expanding the initiative to other cities.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says using firefighters to gather intelligence is another step towards lost privacy rights. According to the ACLU, the concept is dangerously close to the Bush Administration’s proposal in 2002 to have postal workers and telephone repairmen report suspicious behavior to law enforcement authorities. The ACLU’s concern seems to center on the fact that firefighters do not need a warrant to access thousands of homes and buildings each year.

If a law enforcement agency utilizes this program and the FDNY to circumvent the requirement to obtain a search warrant, then shame on them. My experience tells me that is not the true intent here and the program will not be exploited. DHS should be commended for continuing to develop “lookouts” for suspicious activity and sources of information in this War on Terror.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Congress, Politics & PR, Emergency Preparedness & Response | Comments

Townsend’s Tenure Shows Need for Separate Advisory Roles

Saturday, November 24th, 2007

Fran Townsend did an exceptional job in a very difficult position for the President as his Homeland Security Advisor. One area of debate has been whether the U.S. should have the office of the Homeland Security Advisor merged with the office of the National Security Advisor so that homeland security work is done under the leadership of the NSA. I think that would be a step backward. It would be difficult for one key advisor to concentrate on international challenges like we’re seeing in Pakistan with Musharraf and Bhutto versus the homeland security challenges that we face domestically.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Congress, Politics & PR, Intelligence | Comments

A Rare Word Heard to the Folks Working for the Homeland

Thursday, November 22nd, 2007

Not a day goes by in Washington or elsewhere in this country when there is not some headline or piece in the media decrying all of the problems that bemoan the Department of Homeland Security. In truth, those problem go beyond the federal department and are shared by other public and private sector players that work in the ‘homeland arena’ as well. There is no doubt that the problems that all of these people work are complex and prolific. In fact, all of the issues and problems they are contending with are frustrating and – in many cases – outright terrifying. But for everything going wrong that we document time and again, there are a number of things that are going right.

At the heart of what is right in homeland security is the people.

Across this country and around the world, there are people working every moment of every day to preserve and protect our homeland. From border crossings, airport terminals and Coast Guard cutters, to police/fire stations, office buildings and operations centers, there are men and women who have stepped forward and taken jobs and responsibilities that few Americans know of, appreciate or for that matter, even acknowledge. None of these jobs are glamorous and many of them can be downright tedious, but they are done to preserve the very way of life we all too often forget was born of sacrifice, principle and an ideal instilled by our Creator and forged by our Nation’s founders.

Their service, along with those of our men and women in military uniform around the globe, should be remembered and acknowledged as well. Caught up in the race that is our daily life, we often forget to take a moment to appreciate what all of these people do. If you do take that moment, you will note how truly impressive it is what they do to make you and your family safe and secure every day. That is a gift that is often hard to remember, especially after the TSA screener at the airport opens up your luggage for all to see and makes you throw out your tube of toothpaste because you folded the end over so it can fit in the one quart bag. However, it’s one that we should all take a moment to appreciate.

We don’t do that enough in this country.

We are quick to mock what many of them do as a joke. We are even faster to hurl names and accusations at them for what job was done or was not done to our satisfaction.

None of the people working in these jobs is perfect or has performed perfectly. The fact is that none of them ever will be either but each of these people deserves to hear a simple word from us for what they do to serve us and the homeland.

Thanks.

Tags:
Posted in Congress, Politics & PR | Comments

Homeland Security Committee Chair Gives Myers Thumbs Up

Wednesday, November 21st, 2007

Both the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee say they will support the nomination of Julie Myers to lead U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the Department of Homeland Security.

With Lieberman and Collins both supporting Myers nomination, the nation’s chief immigration and smuggling enforcement officer wins the patina of bipartisanship. This will make it more difficult — though by new means impossible — for senators like Claire McCaskill of Missouri to rally enough opposition to block her nomination.

With so many other administration targets in the sights of the Democratic Senate, the Majority Leader will have to decide whether opposing Myers is worth the distraction and energy and potential risk of painting the Democratic-controlled Senate as more obstructionist than concerned with homeland security.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Congress, Politics & PR, Immigration & Visa Policy, Law Enforcement, Smuggling, Uncategorized | Comments

Another DHS Re-organization? Not a Good Idea

Wednesday, November 21st, 2007

Last week the Progressive Policy Institute and Democratic Leadership Council sponsored a panel on new ideas for defending the U.S. and defeating terrorism. Some of the ideas have merit, some need a bit more thinking through, but one of the ideas almost made me yell Arrrrrrrgh.

Elaine Kamarck, a lecturer at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and former White House staffer during the Clinton Administration, proposed taking FEMA out of the Department of Homeland Security, saying that putting FEMA there “was kind of an intellectual mistake.”

I think it is futile to argue whether the decision to put FEMA in the department was an intellectual mistake. What I don’t think is futile, however, is to think through the implications of yet another major reorganization.

Let’s remember that the organization of a federal agency is more than the sum of a set of boxes and chains of command — it is a complex web of relationships, budgetary arrangements, congressional oversight, and public understanding of how an organization does business (and how the public does business with the organization).

An organization such as FEMA can work well in spite of a sub-optimal organizational chart — if the organization and its people have time to establish relationships with other entities, define lanes of responsibility, and communicate responsibilities and avenues of redress to the public. Along with a motivated and high-performing workforce, these are the real factors of success in a federal agency, not the way boxes are arranged on a chart. Shifting offices, reporting chains, and personnel disrupts these critical elements to organizational success, and an organization can take years to reestablish an understanding of responsibilities, relationships, and authorities.

FEMA and the Department as a whole have made notable strides in the national response process. Our most significant natural disaster since Katrina, though vastly different in nature and scale, shows the lessons the Department has learned and the game plan of responsibilities DHS has clearly articulated to state and local governments. The Department, and the public, deserve the opportunity to let the current arrangement mature. And though I’m not especially fond of the phrase, this is a circumstance in which “perfect” is the enemy of “good.”

It has been over six years since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and we have been fortunate to avoid a large-scale natural disaster since Katrina hit the Gulf Coast in fall 2005. In my view, the Department of Homeland Security has wisely used the interceding time to plan, exercise, and publicize our response framework.

A significant reorganization like the one proposed by Kamarck would effectively wipe those gains clean, and force FEMA back two to four years in terms of defining lanes of responsibility and building the relationships that make an organization work. It is an rearrangement that might look good on the white board of a classroom or a Power Point slide, but it is a rearrangement the nation can’t afford.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Congress, Politics & PR, Emergency Preparedness & Response | Comments

Debate Over Detainees at GITMO Raises Larger Issue

Tuesday, November 20th, 2007

At Guantanamo Bay (GITMO), the question of where to hold a significant portion of the detainees who are not being brought before military commissions is the subject of an article from yesterday’s issue of the Financial Times. Lawyers representing the detainees have expressed concern about prolonged detentions and have even argued against the legality of the military commission system used to try some of the prisoners. In any event, these lawyers continue to hope that the new wave of military commissions will “help [the U.S.] move towards the goal of closing the detention facilities”.

There is a need for Americans to redirect the debate over GITMO, since an answer that involves merely closing the facility in Cuba does not mean that a similar compound here in the United States would be immune to criticism. Instead, the focus at the heart of the debate over Guantanamo should be on how the U.S. government treats its detainees and how we prosecute the war on terrorism. If America succeeds in this respect, location will prove to be an ancillary concern. Read more here.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Featured Feed | Comments

The Profitable Business of Terrorism: Sinn Fein and Iraq

Tuesday, November 20th, 2007

An article in the Washington Post by Amit Paley makes the case that the Iraqi insurgency is as much about cash as conviction.

The relationship between organised crime and terrorism is not new. The General shouldn’t be advising his people to be watching the Sopranos but reading some of the better expose’s of IRA/Sinn Fein and other Northern Irish terrorist groups.

Organisations like Sinn Fein turned ‘The Struggles’ into a very good business. The question becomes: Will the US military learn from the lessons of the very recent past and exploit them?

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Featured Feed | Comments

Critics of DHS’s Immigration Crackdown Should Direct Their Ire at Congress

Tuesday, November 20th, 2007

In today’s Wall Street Journal, a leading advocate for the agricultural community makes an insightful case about the failure of Congress to pass immigration reform. Tom Nassif, CEO of Western Growers, notes candidly that the majority of farm workers are in the country illegally. He also notes that, without these workers, America’s farms could not operate and that America’s food supply would be jeopardized.

“Faced with the option of economic ruin, as hundreds of millions of dollars worth of our livelihood rots in the fields, or the embrace of a fatally flawed immigration system, our industry and farm families opt to survive. Who wouldn’t?,” he writes. “For those who have a 10-20 day harvest window to make or break their entire business year, government promises to fix the system don’t work. We can’t wait for rules to change. We need reform and we need it now.”

Unfortunately, Nassif directs his frustration at the Department of Homeland Security – which is mandated to carry out the immigration laws passed by Congress. As DHS gets its feet beneath it and becomes increasingly more efficient at enforcing immigration laws, those who oppose those laws become proportionately more vocal in their criticisms of the Department. But DHS shouldn’t be the target. DHS didn’t draft the nation’s immigration laws. Congress did.

Until the public gives a clear signal to its elected representatives about what kind of immigration reform is best for America, you’ll continue to see stalemates of the type we saw during this year’s failed immigration debate. And continued non-action on this important issue.

The frustrations expressed by Nassif and others are understandable. And, to their credit, they are not asking that we water down our border security. They are asking simply that we fix the broken and outdated processes of legal immigration:

“Western Growers — representing half of all the fresh fruits and vegetables grown in the U.S. — has repeatedly called for a fix,” he writes. “We want and expect government to enforce immigration laws; we want a secure border, fraud-proof IDs and valid Social Security cards. Despite a broken and unworkable system, however, Congress has chosen not to act.”

Vilifying the men and women who are charged with enforcing the laws passed by Congress, however, won’t fix the broken system. Only our elected representatives in Congress can do that. Mr. Nassif and others who decry our immigration system do need to take action, but they are misdirecting their energies. Until members of Congress feel the heat to take action, nothing will change.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Border Security, Congress, Politics & PR, Immigration & Visa Policy, Law Enforcement | Comments

Are We Ready For 100% Cargo Scanning?

Monday, November 19th, 2007

Last week in a hearing of the House Homeland Security Committee, Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) made statements that shed light on the potentially problematic process of implementing a 100% screening requirement for cargo containers.

Thompson – one of the most vocal and steadfast supporters of the 100% scanning requirement that was included as part of the recently passed 9/11 Bill – stated that he would be open to the possibility of delaying implementation of the program. Though Thompson maintained that he believes the necessary technology is available, he admitted that he would be open to further study that examines the feasibility of implementing the requirement.

Thompson’s change in position illustrates that proponents of a 100% scanning cargo policy were perhaps overconfident in their statements that assured members of Congress that the complicated and expensive technology necessary to implement the system already exists.

In addition to raising valid questions about the technological feasibility of the mandate, Thompson’s statements should also prompt a re-examination of the much more important security implications of a 100% cargo scanning system.

We are similarly lacking evidence that shows replacing the current risk-based system of security with a “100%” approach will actually make our country’s ports safer. In fact, most of the evidence we do have suggests just the opposite.

With Thompson calling on industry for assistance in meeting the mandate’s deadline, now is the time to raise concerns about the misguided nature of a 100% regime and show that our efforts should be placed in forming smart, effective solutions for our nation’s security.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Congress, Politics & PR, Maritime & Seaport Security, Supply Chain Security | Comments

Giving Legal License to Illegal Immigrants

Sunday, November 18th, 2007

The Washington Post today editorializes in favor of giving legal driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. In the process the newspaper makes a misleading argument:

“Polls show that a majority of Americans believe issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants is a bad idea. Many fear that it will tempt more immigrants to enter this country illegally. That’s hokum; people who sneak into the country or overstay their visas do so for jobs, not licenses.”

First, people who sneak into the country or overstay their visas do so for a number of reasons. You need only look so far as September 11th or the original 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center for two obvious examples.

Nonetheless, it is true that most people who exploit our immigration system are doing so to get jobs and make a better life for themselves. However, the Post’s strange assertion that giving legal driver’s licenses to such individuals has nothing to do with their ability to get jobs misses (or simply ignores) the obvious fact that having a driver’s license is a key requirement for most jobs.

The Post is free to call for looser immigration policies. However, it should do so via an accurate debate of the merits. Offering driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants would offer clear incentives for additional illegal immigration. The real debate, the politically charged one that too many editorial writers and politicians refuse to address directly, is whether our immigration laws need to be reformed.

Instead, politicians like Eliot Spitzer of New York prefer the politically popular tact of criticizing the federal government for not enforcing the nation’s immigration laws even while they keep attempting to pass other laws and regulations (like legal driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants) that undermine the federal government’s ability to enforce the immigration laws currently on the books.

Tags: ,
Posted in Border Security, Congress, Politics & PR, Immigration & Visa Policy | Comments

Pakistan Deserves Leadership With Legitimacy

Friday, November 16th, 2007

The week’s tumultuous events in Pakistan have proven that the United States’ role in the global fight against terrorism extends far beyond the borders of Iraq.

As opposition to the current state of emergency mounts, the United States has a historic opportunity to seize the momentum of the still- fledgling democracy movement by making it clear that we support an end to military rule — what is, in effect, martial law — in Pakistan.

While Pakistan has been a loyal if sometimes hesitant ally of the United States under the leadership of Gen. Pervez Musharraf, his misjudgments of late — including his transparent effort to maintain political power even if by force of arms against legitimate political opposition such as Benazir Bhutto — have eroded his support among the public. In order for Pakistan to sustain a long-term fight against terrorism, there must be a leader with a public mandate.

If the United States does not take this risk of pushing for fair and immediate elections, we run the greater risk of fueling Pakistan’s militant voices and setting the stage for chaos in the streets or even, potentially, the emergence of another regime like the Taliban in Afghanistan or Iran. That is a risk we cannot afford to take. The success of the War on Terror – and the security of the United States – will depend upon the legitimacy of leadership in Pakistan.

Tags: ,
Posted in Featured Feed | Comments

It’s Not Over Until The Alien Wins!

Thursday, November 15th, 2007

A Dallas newspaper reported on an Albanian citizen who is facing removal to his home country four years after first applying for asylum in the United States. While the article does not go into many details about this case, it does indicate how the gentleman entered the United States with a false Italian passport sometime after 1998; settled in the United States long enough to own several businesses; filed an application for political asylum; had his asylum application denied in 2003; and now, in 2007, has had his appeal denied by the Board of Immigration Appeals.

End of story, right? Wrong! His attorney has decided to appeal the Board’s decision to a U.S. District Court. In the interim, Congressman Louie Gohmert introduced a private bill allowing this gentleman to remain in the United States until 2009.

A final decision in this case will not be made until the next decade and as for the eventual outcome …who knows! I wish I could say this case is the exception, but sadly it is not. Thousands of cases are clogging the immigration removal process, languishing for years because of hearing continuances, numerous opportunities for appeal and review and congressional intervention.

I don’t know how much of the taxpayers’ dollars are spent on cases like this, but I would venture to guess the amount is staggering.

I laugh and then cringe when I hear talk about efforts to increase immigration enforcement in our country. Don’t misread me; we need to enforce our immigration laws and remove people who have violated those laws after they have had their day (not days or years) in court. However, the current immigration removal process is complicated and fragile. Any number of events and actions can delay the process for inordinate amounts of time or stop it dead in its tracks.

If comprehensive immigration reform gets a second or third life (I have lost count), Congress must make a serious effort to streamline the immigration removal process. Without this kind of reform, immigration enforcement efforts will continue to be hampered.

Posted in Border Security, Congress, Politics & PR, Immigration & Visa Policy | Comments

Impact of Blackwater Killings Goes Beyond Iraq

Wednesday, November 14th, 2007

The past three days have created two critical news stories. The first, that a Dyncorp convoy was responsible for the death of a taxi driver in Baghdad, went by almost unnoticed. The second, that the FBI apparently has judged that 14 of the 17 deaths in Nisoor Square on September 16 were unjustified. As none of the reports are official, rather from the media, I state here clearly that I am talking about what is reported, and not representing them as the absolute facts.

Regarding the death of the taxi driver: apparently the convoy did report that they had ‘discharged a weapon,’ but that the shot had been aimed at the hood of the car. There was no report of non-lethal measures taken to warn the car. The team was reportedly amazed that someone had been killed; if true, this says a lot about the lack of care taken in placing the rounds.

It has always been the dogma of the professional, particularly in a COIN (counter-insurgency) operation, that if you are not confident where the bullet is going to land, don’t engage. A clear safe shot into the ground gives a lot more room for error than the hood of a car – depending on the angle, a slight bump in the road as the bullet was traveling down the barrel changed the trajectory from warning shot to kill shot.

There is another side to this story, and one at which many will balk, but that must be considered: The private military company (PMC) shooting is the issue de jour, both in the US and Iraq. In a number of quarters, any opportunity to misrepresent a shooting would be enthusiastically embraced – it is the work of a few moments to make a weapon, bomb vest or other evidence simply disappear.

As an aside, here is the really scary thought – the negative publicity is forcing the US to change its practices, and is causing negative pressure abroad and at home. In Northern Ireland, the Sinn Fein/IRA used to orchestrate negative incidents for the media that attempted to entice the British Army to act badly, in order to engender similar pressure and create sympathy amongst those vulnerable to such propaganda, including in the US (Remember the days when to many they weren’t terrorists but freedom fighters, until 9/11 changed that romantic ideal?)

At what point does someone suitably motivated, knowing the negative publicity that will be generated and the potential recruiting effect it affords, orchestrate an event that plays to the manner in which PMCs operate?

Whilst this is an asymmetric operation on a new plane, it is neither unreasonable nor unachievable – to what lengths would someone go to mimic an attack if they knew that their ‘innocent death’ in front of many witnesses at the hands of the Americans would create 10, 20 or 30 recruits for suicide bombings globally and more pressure on the US?

It appears that the FBI has concluded that 14 of the 17 deaths in Nisoor Square were unjustified. Interesting conclusions for two reasons. The first is that the military felt all 17 were unjustified, and from a professional, COIN perspective, that very well may have been true. One assumes the military report perspective was, “If it had been us, what would we have done?” The FBI, on the other hand, is interested in what it can prove, and what the potentially applicable laws say.

The second reason is the reported (by the NY Times) outrage on Capitol Hill, that someone must be prosecuted, that the new Attorney General must make the laws work, etc.

This is a growth industry that was not regulated. Now it is going to be. That legislators waited until there was a sufficient weight of serious incidents before taking action and changing laws is not the Attorney General’s fault. It is theirs.

There is a breadth of proposals in Congress; as yet, they all focus on the contractors working for the government, leaving those contractors working for private firms immune from the rigid oversight and reporting requirements. This must be addressed. Equally important is the need to make these laws universal — not applied only to Iraq or Afghanistan.

Everything done to date on the matter of misuse of force by private military companies has the whiff of politics – of too-little too-late and knee-jerk response. If the government and the Congress are to face up to this problem properly, they need to put in place a regime that creates hurdles for entry, based on a clear set of professional standards, and then enforce those standards through licensing and audits.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Congress, Politics & PR, Private and Physical Security | Comments

Don’t forget her record…

Tuesday, November 13th, 2007

The recent coverage of Julie Myers stalled nomination to be Assistant Secretary for ICE is missing something…discussion of her performance record in her office. While it is more than appropriate to ask tough questions as to what happened at the Combined Federal Campaign Halloween Party at which she and two others were costume judges, there also needs to be analysis of how she has performed since she took the position in early 2006.

Since the incident broke in the media, Myers has been forthcoming in her apologies to the employees that were there and to others that were offended by the tasteless costume that was worn by an ICE employee. Her proactive outreach to those parties and others is indicative of someone who does care about the people and the environment where she works and her performance record is indicative of that. Furthermore, in the job she has been doing for nearly two years, Julie’s service record at ICE answers the critics and skeptics of how she would perform. Investigations, arrests and prosecutions are all up and as a result, the job the President asked her to do in 2005 has been getting done. Isn’t that the ultimate metric we want?

Consider these statistics:

  • In Fiscal Year 2007, U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested 3,563 gang members and their associates. This includes 1,489 criminal arrests.
  • Under Operation Community Shield ICE has arrested more than 7,655 members and associates of approximately 700 different gangs. Of those apprehended 2,444 have been charged criminally and 5,211 have been charged with immigration violations and processed for removal.
  • Over a three month period this summer ICE arrested more than 1,300 violent street gang members and associates in 23 cities across 19 states.
  • ICE has expanded its Criminal Alien Program to identify incarcerated criminal aliens. In Fiscal Year 2007, ICE identified for removal 164,296 criminals who were incarcerated in federal, state and local facilities.
  • ICE has increased its fugitive operations teams from 15 in 2005 to 75 today. As a result, the fugitive alien population has plummeted by more than 35,000.
  • ICE continues to increase worksite enforcement operations. In Fiscal Year 2007, ICE made 863 criminal arrests and 4,077 administrative arrests for a total of 4,940 arrests.
  • In Fiscal Year 2007, DHS obtained more than $30 million in criminal fines, restitutions and civil judgments as a result of worksite enforcement.

By no means should Julie get a free pass on what occurred last month. It is more than appropriate that she answer questions from her staff at ICE, the leadership at DHS and Members of Congress about what happened at the party but the ‘tisk, tisk, tisk,’ finger waving by some of the Congressional Members is practically laughable when you apply a performance metric to them.

Think about this for a second… We’re still waiting on Congress to approve a budget; we can’t get an immigration bill put together; we can’t streamline Congressional Committee oversight of DHS but we can still make it to fundraisers on time and express “shock, horror and outrage” when a federal employee somewhere does something stupid as the ICE employee did when he made his costume choice.

Julie made a mistake, admitted it and apologized for it. But the last time I checked, she was being nominated to be the Assistant Secretary for Immigration & Customs Enforcement, not to co-host with Joan & Melissa Rivers and survey and analyze the red carpet fashions of Washington or Capitol Hill.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Border Security, Congress, Politics & PR, Immigration & Visa Policy | Comments

To Issue or Not to Issue…the Question of Issuing Driver’s Licenses to Illegal Immigrants Hits the Presidential Campaigns

Tuesday, November 13th, 2007

Gov. Spitzer’s grenade in the form of his proposal to issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants landed square in the middle of the Presidential Campaign recently, resulting in mixed responses and informative insight on how the candidates view immigration as an issue of national security.

The issue is very clear. The bipartisan 9/11 Commission highlighted the ease with which the 9/11 hijackers were able to obtain numerous driver’s licenses that helped them successfully attack our country. The 9/11 Commission recommended improving the process for issuing state identification documents to individuals, to include determining whether an applicant had legal immigration status in the United States. The REAL ID Act was Congress’ response and required enhanced identity verification processes and checks on immigration status before a driver’s license or state identification card is issued. This all seems to make sense. Driver’s licenses are heavily relied upon in our society as proof of identity and is the key “breeder” document from which individuals obtain other documents and are able to navigate freely in our society. Not enhancing issuance procedure will only continue the loophole that may be exploited by criminals and terrorists who are seeking to assimilate in our society as they plan their unlawful activities. So what did the candidates think on this issue of national security and integrity in our immigration system?

The clear loser in this exercise was Sen. Hillary Clinton who proceeded to perform her version of Howard and Costello’s “Who’s on First” routine on a national debate and ultimately accuse the moderator of playing a game of “gotcha” in of all forums, a presidential debate. It was only after her yes-no-yes response became a hot point that her campaign subsequently issued a carefully worded statement that “supported” Gov. Spitzer’s goal but did not endorse it. In fairness to the stumped candidate, it probably would have been equally entertaining to see the other Democratic candidates perform their own improv routines to this straight forward question.

Compare Sen. Clinton’s response to Mayor Giuliani’s response. Not only did he immediately and decisively reject Spitzer’s puzzling proposal, but he also took action to eliminate this potential loophole by calling Rep. King and Rep. Sessions and getting their commitment to submit legislation to prohibit states like New York from issuing driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. None of the other candidates, including several current Senators who can introduce legislation, have offered a similar solution.

Perhaps a hypothetical would be beneficial in shedding light on this issue. Let’s suppose a terrorist in the U.S. was plotting to blow up a military base. Despite being here illegally, he obtains a New York driver’s license which he uses to rent a car. He pays for the car rental in cash he withdrew that morning from a U.S. bank account he was able to open by presenting his New York driver’s license and which was funded by overseas wires from his terrorist organization. He loads concealed explosives into the trunk of the car and starts his drive from New York to Virginia a few days before the planned attack to rendezvous with other accomplices. Nervous, he fails to realize he is speeding before a Virginia State Trooper pulls him over. Stopped on the side of the road, the terrorist presents his New York driver’s license to the State Trooper. The driver’s license is confirmed by the Trooper as being valid and properly issued by New York. With no other suspicion, the Trooper issues him a ticket and properly allows him to proceed on his way. The terrorist departs, meets his accomplices, and two days later succeeds in his attack.

If the terrorist was illegal and unable to obtain a driver’s license, he may have had to resort to driving without a driver’s license or with a fraudulent one that could be detected at a stop. Either scenario raises the risk of being exposed. Either scenario would likely have resulted with the terrorist in our hypothetical being arrested by the State Trooper for the driving infraction. This would have resulted in his car being impounded, searched and the terrorist plot being disrupted. In addition, his illegal status may have been detected following his arrest and would have served as another basis for him being detained and unable to complete his plot. Based on this hypothetical, could a Presidential candidate logically “support” a plan to issue these documents to illegal immigrants?

Perhaps this is another game of “gotcha” based on a far-fetched and implausible hypothetical? Unfortunately, that is not the case. Just after midnight on September 9, 2001, Ziad Jarrah received a speeding ticket in Maryland as he headed north on I-95 towards Newark to rendezvous with three other hijackers. Ziad Jarrah, who had violated his immigration status at the time of the stop, presented a valid Virginia driver’s license, was issued a $270 speeding ticket, and allowed to leave in the absence of any other violation. Two days later, Ziad Jarrah piloted hijacked United Flight 93 into a field in Pennsylvania, killing many heroic civilians. This was not the only traffic incident involving 9/11 hijackers that may have led to a different outcome if they were not in possession of driver’s licenses. Two other 9/11 pilots and a muscle hijacker – ringleader Mohammed Atta, Hani Hanjour, and Nawaf Al Hazmi – were stopped by local police for driving violations prior to 9/11. All three were in violation of their immigration status, one blatantly having overstayed his visa. All three presented a valid driver’s license when stopped, were issued tickets, and released to continue their plotting for the attack. In total, three of the four 9/11 hijacker pilots had traffic stop incidents before 9/11.

Virginia learned its lesson and immediately changed it driver’s license procedures after 9/11, to include enhanced screening of the immigration status of all applicants. The 9/11 Commission recognized this national security vulnerability and highlighted this issue in its report. The real question to be answered is why – in given our recent history – are some Presidential candidates, including a Senator from the state that was attacked on 9/11, still unable to understand the security vulnerabilities created by any proposal to issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants?

Posted in Border Security, Immigration & Visa Policy | Comments

Unauthorized Access at O’Hare Exposes Continued Border Security Concerns

Monday, November 12th, 2007

Last week’s arrest of 23 workers at O’Hare International Airport for allegedly using fraudulent airport security badges exposed continuing weaknesses in securing the border. The joint law enforcement investigation between the Cook County Sheriff’s Department and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) disclosed that more than 100 workers employed by Ideal Staffing Solutions, Bensenville, Illinois illegally obtained airport security badges issued by the Chicago Department of Aviation. These badges allowed the workers to enter secure areas (including the tarmac) while loading pallets, freight and meals for airline companies doing business at O’Hare.

Ideal Staffing Solutions allegedly provided some workers with deactivated airport security badges issued in other names, allowing them to bypass the appropriate screening. The workers were allegedly instructed to pick a badge that most closely resembled their own likeness. ICE agents reviewed more than 150 airport security badge applications submitted to the Department of Aviation for 120 employees of Ideal Staffing and learned that 110 of the applications listed Social Security numbers that either did not exist or belonged to other persons, some of whom were deceased.

This should not have happened in the post 9/11 environment where access to secure areas at our air and seaports was tightened through enhanced background checks and investigations of current and prospective employees. Ideal Staffing Solutions (as charged) violated the public trust by entering into a conspiracy with the illegal workers to circumvent the appropriate security screening. But one must question how it is possible for anyone to use a deactivated airport security badge to gain access at O’Hare, and how it is possible to use a Social Security number that either does not exist or belongs to someone else to get a badge.

The deactivated security badges should have been immediately deleted from the system (and destroyed), and a simple check of the Social Security Number Verification System (SSNVS) would have revealed that these workers were unauthorized to work in the US. The SSNVS is made available to public and private industry at no cost by the Social Security Administration to determine the validity of a Social Security number. Although a “non-match” does not require immediate termination of employment, it does require the employer and employee to rectify the discrepancy.

All the checks, balances and investigations in the world to secure the border do not matter if we fail to use them. The investigation at O’Hare not only addressed an immediate threat but also exposed additional areas that need to be reviewed and tightened.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Border Security, Immigration & Visa Policy | Comments

We Have More Homework To Do…

Saturday, November 10th, 2007

On October 30th, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff was joined by Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez and Education Secretary Margaret Spellings at Mt. Vernon High School in Alexandria, VA, to promote their collaborative efforts and initiatives to improve the preparedness of America’s schools. Given the constant demands upon the schedules of Cabinet Secretaries, it’s not often that you can get two of them in one room to meet but getting three of them together is a real coup. I guess it’s sort of like docking the Space Shuttle to the Space Station – it requires lots of patience and practice. I have no doubt that this was a nightmare for the scheduling staffs but it is a credit to each of the Secretaries and their Departments to come together to talk about an issue that parents wonder about every day as their child goes off to school, “Are you going to be safe?”

Regardless of whether your child goes to public or private school, as a parent, you cannot help but think how safe your kids are from the moment they walk in the schoolhouse door to when they exit the building after the last bell. The tragic shootings that have occurred in K-12 schools (Columbine, Pearl, etc.) over the last decade have been a real wake-up call on a number of fronts. The places that we have all thought of as safe harbors of learning are now implementing plans and procedures for emergencies that go beyond lining the kids up at the classroom door to exit the building for a fire drill. The calls of ‘duck and cover’ that meant something to the baby-boomer generation now have an entirely new context today.

No school community – inner city and rural alike – has been immune. Like the fires, tornadoes and earthquakes that strike with random fury, school shootings have been equal opportunity tragedies that leave grief, sorrow and scars in their wake.

DHS, Commerce and Education deserve a firm ‘thumbs up’ and some strong applause from all of us for coming together to promote safer schools and preparedness and for paying particular attention to the K-12 community. Unfortunately, their efforts and energies fall dramatically short when it comes to the higher education community. If there is any soft underbelly of vulnerability when it comes to education readiness and resiliency, it is in our universities, colleges, community colleges, technical schools and other institutions of higher learning.

It is all to easy to point to the tragedy at Virginia Tech this past April or the September shootings at Delaware State University as default examples of campus vulnerabilities. While there is no dispute to the heartbreak and impacts of those incidents, the men and women that were shot or killed in those horrific incidents are just one part of the picture of campus vulnerability that we need to pay greater attention to if lives, property, communities and reputations are to remain intact.

Nowhere has the campus vulnerability lesson been more painfully learned than in the State of Louisiana. Campuses of all types, sizes, disciplines and locations bore as much of the wrath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita as did the notable communities (New Orleans, Plaquemines, Lake Charles, St Bernard, etc.) that dominated the media coverage for months. Students, faculty and staff from schools such as Tulane, Xavier, McNeese University and others were evacuated and dispersed across the country; buildings and other education infrastructures were destroyed or damaged by the storm and flooding; classes for the first semester or entire year were either disrupted or cancelled outright; and so forth. Each of these impacts is individually significant but combined together; they are a very formidable nightmare to contend.

Only compounding the vulnerabilities of the higher education community is the fact that there is no one point in the Federal Government for these impacted schools (or those that will have to contend with future emergencies) to turn to for help or guidance in preparing, responding and becoming more resilient institutions. While there are pockets of help within the Department of Education and DHS (i.e., FEMA, Infrastructure Protection Division, US Secret Service), the lack of a ‘center of gravity’ to give voice, energy and leadership leaves this important community often overlooked and forgotten.

This condition is only exacerbated further when you recognize that higher education is not even on the immediate ‘radar screen’ when it comes to considering critical infrastructures and key resources. [It’s considered a ‘subsector’ under the Government Facilities Sector which is led by the Department of Education's Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools.] I guess that is sort of like being the third cousin, once removed on your mom’s side that is forgotten about when its time to have a family reunion photo taken.

Again, there has been some really solid work and efforts done by individual components of DHS, the Department of Education as well as other federal partners in trying to better protect students, teachers and staff but if we are really serious about instilling a ‘culture of preparedness among schools,’ the current loose confederation of interested parties needs to create a single point for leadership and action for the education community and in particular, the higher education community to engage. Having one piece here, another there and another one way over yonder is no way to provide leadership or real initiative. As parents working with our kids at the kitchen table doing homework, we know that piece-meal approaches are not acceptable when trying to complete an assignment. They shouldn’t be acceptable when we want our schools to be better prepared either.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Emergency Preparedness & Response, Law Enforcement | Comments

« Older Entries
©2008 Adfero Group. All Rights Reserved.