Bin Laden, The 9/11 Commission Report and Immigration

Michael's picture

By Michael W. Cutler

Mike is a Senior Fellow with CAPS and retired INS Senior Special Agent. During his 30-year career with the INS he rotated through all of the squads within the Investigations Branch. He was assigned to the Unified Intelligence Division of the DEA and for 10 years was assigned, as an INS Senior Special Agent, to the Organized Crime, Drug Enforcement Task Force. He has testified at numerous hearings conducted by committees and subcommittees of the House and Senate and provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission.

He hosts "The Michael Cutler Hour" on USA Talk Radio Fridays at 7 p.m. (EST) and is frequently interviewed by broadcast media on various aspects of immigration issues, especially the nexus to national security.

The writer's views are his own.

May 22, 2015

On May 2, 2011, a team of highly skilled and incredibly courageous U.S. Navy SEALS staged a raid on the Pakistani compound of Osama bin Laden, the terrorist behind the mass killings in the United States on September 11, 2001. He and others in the compound were killed, and a huge treasure-trove of documents was seized.

It has been widely reported that a review of these documents uncovered that bin Laden was intent on focusing his and Al Qaeda’s efforts virtually exclusively on launching additional mass casualty attacks inside the United States.

A small number of those documents were made public on May 19, 2015, and on the next day The New York Times published a report, “In Osama bin Laden Library: Illuminati and Bob Woodward,” that described what American commandos discovered when they raided bin Laden’s compound.

From naturalized citizen and D.C. cab driver …

The report noted that among documents made public was a “job application” for those wanting to join Al Qaeda. The report noted that the last page of the questionnaire asked, “Do you wish to execute a suicide operation?” and “Who should we contact in case you become a matyr.”

Here is a significant paragraph from The New York Times report about a few of the declassified documents:

He also appeared to have maintained a keen interest in what the United States government thought of Al Qaeda. A copy of ‘The 9/11 Commission Report’ was found in the compound in Abbottabad, as were three reports on Al Qaeda by the Congressional Research Service. There was also an application for American citizenship (no word on whether it was filled out).

The 9/11 Commission Report” and the companion report, “9/11 and Terrorist Travel - Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States,” addressed a number of issues concerning how Al Qaeda was able to carry out attacks against the U.S., not just on September 11, 2001, but in a number of prior attacks.

High on the list of root causes of the attacks were failures of the visa process and the immigration system, including concerns about border security and the inspections process conducted at ports of entry by employees of the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service).

The failure of the immigration system to routinely apprehend illegal aliens was also identified as a serious vulnerability that terrorists have exploited and likely will continue to exploit.

The adjudications process for immigration benefits also came under scrutiny, and the lack of integrity to the process enabling fraud to go undetected raised concerns such fraud had provided terrorists with the ability to embed themselves in communities around the U.S.

On March 9, 2015, The Daily Caller published my article, "Congress Has Fully Funded The DHS – America’s Biggest Document Mill” in which I addressed the abject lack of integrity to the immigration adjudications program.

The fact that an application for U.S. citizenship, the most valuable of all immigration benefits that can be bestowed on an alien, was found in the bin Laden compound is nothing short of chilling!

… to Syrian terrorist?

Over the past several years naturalized U.S. citizens were identified as being involved in terrorism; consider my February 24, 2015, article for Progressives For Immigration Reform, “The Immigration Factor – Naturalized U.S. Citizen Added to FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists List.” My commentary focused on a naturalized U.S. citizen who drove a cab in Washington, D.C., for years and is now believed to be fighting in Syria. The FBI is greatly concerned about his intimate familiarity with D.C. that makes him extremely dangerous and has offered a significant reward for information about him.

On January 23, 2015, FrontPage Magazine published my article, “Sleeper Cells: The Immigration Component of the Threat,” which delved into the embedding tactics of terrorists and how our politicians and law enforcement leaders refuse to acknowledge the role effective immigration enforcement can and must play in protecting America and Americans. I noted, among other examples of willful blindness, the case of Faisal Shahzad who was born in Pakistan and first came to the U.S. at age 20. How on earth could anyone, especially the commisioner of the NYPD call him “Home Grown?”

Consider the excerpt from my piece:

Former NYPD Police Commissioner Ray Kelly apparently fell victim to this mis-identification of foreign terrorists when he described Faisal Shahzad, the so-called ‘Times Square Bomber,’ as being ‘homegrown.’ The title of a New York Post article, published on May 11, 2010, quoted Commissioner Kelly, ‘Kelly: NYC bomb suspect homegrown.

It would certainly appear that the leader of Al Qaeda read the 9/11 Commission report; it is questionable if our leaders have. Bin Laden found an application for United States Citizenship to have value. Do our politicians?

The title of my May 19, 2015, article for FrontPage Magazine will serve as the conclusion for my commentary today: “Terrorists Value U.S. Citizenship More Than Our Politicians Do: The dangerous lack of scrutiny of those gaining legal status to the U.S.”
 

CAPS blog posts may be republished or reposted only in their entirety. Please credit CAPS as www.capsweb.org. CAPS assumes no responsibility for where blog posts might be republished or reposted. Views expressed in CAPS blog posts do not necessarily reflect the official position of CAPS.

Top