{"id":25355,"date":"2022-01-19T13:30:37","date_gmt":"2022-01-19T18:30:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=25355"},"modified":"2022-01-19T16:31:56","modified_gmt":"2022-01-19T21:31:56","slug":"texas-synagogue-hostage-warnings-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2022\/01\/19\/texas-synagogue-hostage-warnings-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"British Terrorist Situation in Texas Underscores Failures of Current Intelligence and Immigration Systems"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

This past weekend, Malik Faisal Akram, a 44-year-old British national, took four people hostage<\/a> at a Texas synagogue before he was killed by an FBI Hostage Rescue Team. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Akram was allowed entry to the United States despite having an extensive criminal record that neither U.S. intelligence<\/a> nor British intelligence<\/a> agencies flagged. The situation underscores several failures of intelligence and immigration systems currently in place.
 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Five weeks ago, Akram landed in the United States at New York\u2019s John F. Kennedy International Airport. He likely entered<\/a> to the country under the U.S. Visa Waiver Program (VWP). The program allows citizens of 40 countries that are considered low national security threats and have low levels of illegal immigration the ability to travel to the U.S. without obtaining a visa or in-person screening. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Akram qualified for this program despite having an extensive criminal record\u2014with charges and\/or red flags including<\/a>: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 In 1996, he served a 6-month jail sentence for violent disorder following a baseball bat attack on a member of his extended family. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 In 1997, he served another jail term for destruction of private property.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 In 1999, he was jailed for harassment and, after release, jailed again for violating the terms of his release.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 In September 2001, he was banned from a local courthouse for threatening staff on multiple occasions, including on days when he was not due in court. According to reports, he would rant about the September 11 attacks.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 In 2012, he was arrested for stealing a phone and robbing a man of \u00a35,000.

\u2022 While serving time in prison, he was reported by the prison Imam for \u201cconcerning and disruptive behavior\u201d at Friday prayers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 He regularly visited Pakistan and was reportedly a member of Tablighi Jamaat\u2014 an Islamic organization banned in several countries and known for its ties to terrorism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2022 He regularly participated in anti-Semitic demonstrations and marched for the release of terrorist prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The VWP has raised national security concerns in recent years. Despite France and Belgium qualifying for the 40-country list, the large-scale terrorist attacks in Paris in November 2015<\/a> and in Belgium in March 2016<\/a>, were perpetrated mainly by French and Belgian citizens. Just weeks before this incident, FAIR warned<\/a> about the potential security risks posed by German nationals entering under VWP. Its new government recently made it less difficult to obtain citizenship, making it easier for potential security threats access to the U.S. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Akram took hostages in an effort to secure the release of Aafia Siddiqui, who is currently serving an 86-year sentence in a federal prison in Texas. Siddiqui, also known as \u201cLady al Qaeda<\/a>,\u201d was convicted in 2010 on seven charges including attempted murder and armed assault on U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While reports indicate that Akram was not flagged by U.S. and British intelligence agencies, he was the subject of an MI5 British investigation in late 2020. However, by the time he flew to the U.S., he was assessed to  no longer<\/a> be a threat. How he was designated as a non-threat in a matter of months despite an extensive criminal record and worrisome past remains unclear. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

President Biden\u2019s revocation of certain Trump executive orders\u2014including one that sought to enhance the vetting of foreign nationals traveling to the United States\u2014may have given Akram easier access into the country.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This revoked order called<\/a> to protect \u201ccitizens from terrorist attacks and other public-safety threats\u201d with \u201cscreening and vetting protocols\u201d and \u201cinformation-sharing and identify management\u201d from \u201cforeign governments.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While many elements of\nthe case are still developing, it is clear that several immigration and\nintelligence systems currently in place failed to prevent Akram from entering\nthe country. U.S. intelligence agencies should have flagged his extensive\ncriminal past and prohibited him from entering the country. Based on his\nrecord, MI5 shouldn\u2019t have designated Akram as a non-threat. President Biden\nand his administration should have not revoked an executive order that enhanced\nthe vetting of foreign nationals traveling to the United States\u2014a move that\ncounters the 9\/11 Commission\u2019s recommendations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bottom line: What\nhappened this past weekend shows that we must continue to strengthen vetting\nand that lawmakers and the media must demand answers to these flaws in order to\nmitigate any future threats. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This past weekend, Malik Faisal Akram, a 44-year-old British national, took four people hostage at a Texas synagogue before he was killed by an FBI Hostage Rescue Team. Akram was allowed entry to the United States despite having an extensive criminal record that neither U.S. intelligence nor British intelligence agencies flagged. The situation underscores several<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":73,"featured_media":14855,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[7608],"tags":[1524,219,1298,393],"yst_prominent_words":[12843,12851,12852,2832,12841,12850,12855,12838,6331,2743,12837,9343,12839,6525,12840,12844,1933,12842,12854,12853],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25355"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/73"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25355"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25355\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25358,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25355\/revisions\/25358"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/14855"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25355"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25355"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25355"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=25355"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}