DOCSLIB.ORG

Justice Department Secures Denaturalization of Convicted Terrorist Who Sought to Help Al Qaeda Destroy the Brooklyn Bridge: Moti

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Justice Department Secures Denaturalization of Convicted Terrorist Who Sought to Help Al Qaeda Destroy the Brooklyn Bridge: Moti Case 3:17-cv-00295-SMY-GCS Document 66 Filed 05/24/19 Page 1 of 33 Page ID #320 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Civil Case No. 17-295-SMY-GCS ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) IYMAN FARIS, ) previously known as ) MOHAMMAD RAUF, ) ) Defendant. ) ________________________________ ) PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS & AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT Case 3:17-cv-00295-SMY-GCS Document 66 Filed 05/24/19 Page 2 of 33 Page ID #321 Table of Contents I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 II. Statement of Undisputed Material Facts ................................................................................... 2 III. Standard of review .................................................................................................................... 8 REVOCATION OF NATURALIZATION .................................................................................. 8 SUMMARY JUDGMENT UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 56 .......................... 8 IV. Argument .................................................................................................................................. 9 DEFENDANT MUST BE DENATURALIZED PURSUANT TO 8 U.S.C. § 1451(C)..................... 9 1. Defendant Was Not Attached to the Principles of the Constitution and Well Disposed to the Good Order and Happiness of the United States When He Naturalized .............................................................................................................. 9 2. Defendant’s Conviction for Providing Material Support to al Qaeda Conclusively Establishes the Facts That Prove His Affiliation with a Prohibited Organization and He Is Collaterally Estopped from Contending Otherwise ............................. 10 3. There Is No “Countervailing Evidence” That Overcomes Section 1451(c)’s Rebuttable Presumption ........................................................................................ 12 DEFENDANT ILLEGALLY PROCURED NATURALIZATION BECAUSE HE WAS NEVER LAWFULLY ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE ..................................................... 14 1. Defendant Was Not Lawfully Admitted Because He Was Inadmissible, Having Procured Entry into the United States by Fraud and Willful Misrepresentation, Using the Passport and Visa of Another ............................................................... 17 2. Defendant Was Not Lawfully Admitted Because He Was Inadmissible, Having Sought to Procure Asylum by Willfully Misrepresenting the Circumstances of His Entry into the United States on His Asylum Application ...................................... 19 3. Defendant Was Not Lawfully Admitted Because His Adjustment-of-Status Application Contained Various Material Misrepresentations .............................. 21 DEFENDANT ILLEGALLY PROCURED HIS NATURALIZATION BECAUSE HE LACKED THE REQUIRED GOOD MORAL CHARACTER DUE TO HAVING TESTIFIED FALSELY WITH THE INTENT TO OBTAIN AN IMMIGRATION BENEFIT DURING THE STATUTORY PERIOD ......... 23 1. Defendant Testified Falsely at his Adjustment-of-Status Interview ...................... 23 2. Defendant Testified Falsely at his Naturalization Interview ................................ 25 V. Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 25 i Case 3:17-cv-00295-SMY-GCS Document 66 Filed 05/24/19 Page 3 of 33 Page ID #322 Table of Authorities Cases Adams v. City of Indianapolis, 742 F.3d 720 (7th Cir. 2014) .................................................................................................................................. 11 Appley v. West, 832 F.2d 1021 (7th Cir. 1987) .......................................................................................................................... 10, 11 Azim v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 314 F. App'x 193 (11th Cir. 2008) .......................................................................................................................... 16 Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) .................................................................................................................................................. 8 Daniels v. Pipefitters Ass’n Local Union No. 597, 983 F.2d 800 (7th Cir. 1993) .................................................................................................................................. 13 Davis-Lynch, Inc. v. Moreno, 667 F.3d 539- (5th Cir. 2012) ................................................................................................................................. 13 Esposito v. I.N.S., 936 F.2d 911 (7th Cir. 1991) .................................................................................................................................. 18 Estrada-Ramos v. Holder, 611 F.3d 318 (7th Cir. 2010) .............................................................................................................................. 1, 15 Fedorenko v. United States, 449 U.S. 490 (1981) ............................................................................................................................................ 8, 15 Gozun v. Att’y Gen., 375 F. App’x 276 (3d Cir. 2010) ............................................................................................................................ 16 Hatcher v. Bd. of Trustees of S. Ill. Univ., No. 3:13-cv-407-SMY-SCW, 2018 WL 1640457 (S.D. Ill. Apr. 5, 2018) ............................................................. 13 In re Edmond, 934 F.2d 1304 (4th Cir. 1991) ................................................................................................................................ 13 Injeti v. USCIS, 737 F.3d 311 (4th Cir. 2103) ...................................................................................................................... 15, 16, 22 Karum Holdings LLC v. Lowe’s Cos., 895 F.3d 944 (7th Cir. 2018) .................................................................................................................................. 12 Koszelnik v. Sec’y of Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 828 F.3d 175 (3d Cir. 2016).................................................................................................................................... 16 Kungys v. United States, 485 U.S. 759 (1988) .................................................................................................................................... 15, 18, 23 ii Case 3:17-cv-00295-SMY-GCS Document 66 Filed 05/24/19 Page 4 of 33 Page ID #323 Kyong Ho Shin v. Holder, 607 F.3d 1213 (9th Cir. 2010) ................................................................................................................................ 15 Matter of Kai Hing Hui, 15 I. & N. Dec 288 (B.I.A. 1975) ........................................................................................................................... 16 McMahan v. Deutsche Bank AG, 892 F.3d 926 (7th Cir. 2018) .................................................................................................................................... 9 Mekonnen v. Lynch, 668 F. App’x 481 (4th Cir. 2016) ........................................................................................................................... 16 Musser v. Gentiva Health Servs., 356 F.3d 751 (7th Cir. 2004) .................................................................................................................................. 13 Nat’l Acceptance Co. of Am. v. Bathalter, 705 F.2d 924 (7th Cir. 1983) .................................................................................................................................. 13 Noorani v. Smith, 37 F.3d 1505 (9th Cir. 1994) .................................................................................................................................. 16 Pauliukoniene v. Holder, 496 F. App’x 657 (7th Cir. 2012) ........................................................................................................................... 21 Peprah v. USCIS, No. 12-cv-2564, 2014 WL 4814698 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 29, 2014) ......................................................................................................... 18 Saliba v. Att’y Gen., 828 F.3d 182 (3d Cir. 2016).................................................................................................................................... 15 Sharma v. Reno, 902 F. Supp. 1130 (N.D. Cal. 1995) ....................................................................................................................... 19 Spivey v. Adaptive Marketing, LLC., 622 F.3d 816 (7th Cir. 2010) .................................................................................................................................... 8 Trafficant v. Comm’r, IRS, 884 F.2d 258 (6th Cir. 1989) .................................................................................................................................. 13 U.S. v. Parcels of Land, 903 F.2d 36 (1st Cir. 1990) ..................................................................................................................................... 13 United States v. $133,420.00 in U.S. Currency, 672 F.3d 629 (9th Cir. 2012) .................................................................................................................................. 13 United States v. Akamo, 515 F. App’x 248 (5th Cir. 2012) ..........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Homeland Security Law Policy Jurimetrics
    SYMPOSIUM HOMELAND SECURITY, LAW, AND POLICY THROUGH THE LENS OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND KEY ASSET PROTECTION Joe D. Whitley, George A. Koenig, and Steven E. Roberts* ABSTRACT: Homeland security continues to be one of the principal priorities of government at all levels. Homeland security, however, is not static. What gets pro- tected, how resources are allocated, and the manner in which threats are identified continue to evolve. In particular, critical infrastructure and key asset protection are fundamental components of homeland security greatly influenced by developments in law and policy. CITATION: Joe D. Whitley, George A. Koenig, and Steven E. Roberts, Homeland Security, Law, and Policy Through the Lens of Critical Infrastructure and Key Asset Protection, 47 Jurimetrics J. 259–279. *Joe D. Whitley was the first General Counsel of the Department of Homeland Security and is now an attorney and part of the Global Security and Enforcement Team in the Washington, D.C., office of Alston & Bird L.L.P. George A. Koenig was former Counsel to the General Counsel of the Department of Homeland Security and is now an attorney and part of the Global Security and Enforcement Team in the Washington, D.C., office of Alston & Bird L.L.P. Steven E. Roberts is an attorney specializing in homeland security matters in Boca Raton, Florida. SPRING 2007 259 Whitley et al. I. HOMELAND SECURITY: NOT A POST 9/11 PHENOMENON The escalation of terrorist activity throughout the 1990s suggests that the end of the Cold War ushered in a new era of conflict.1 The terrorist enemies in this war neither maintain standing armies nor subscribe to the laws of war.
    [Show full text]
  • MAJID KHAN, at This Time Please Do Not Comment on the Evidence
    (b )( 1) (b)(3) NatSecAct TOP SECRET !I SCI.J, Verbatim Transcript of Combatant Status Review Tribunal Hearing for ISN 10020 OPENING PRESIDENT· This hearing shall come to order. RECORDER. This Tribunal is being conducted at 08:42 on 15 April 2007 on board U.S. Naval Base GuantanamoBay. Cuba. The following personnel arc present: Colom:! (b)(6) United States Air Fom·. Prcs1dcnt, Cornman er (b)(6) United States Navy, \fomber, Licutc b)(6) United States ·\ir Force, Member, Majo {b){6) Unitt.'tlStates Air Force, Personal Representative, Sergeant ·1rst rs(b)(6 United States Anny, Reporter, Ma.1od(b)(6) l~Stalt!s Air force, Recorder. Lieutenant Colone!~is the Judge Advocate member of the Tribunal. OATH SESSION1 RECORDF.R All rise. PRESIDENT: The Recorder will be !mom. Do you, Major!(b)(6) l swear or aflinn that you will faithfully performthe duties as Recmdcr assigned in this Tribunal, so help you God? RECORDER. I do. PRESIDENT: The Reporter will now he sworn. The Recorder w:11administer the oath. RECORDER: Do you, Sergeant first Cla">s(b)(6) , swear •hat you will faithfully discharge your duties as Rcporter ass1gne in this i'ribunal. so help you Ood'7 REPORTER: I do. PRESIDEN·t. We'll take a brief recess while the Detainee is brought into the room. RECORDER: The time is 08:43 on 15 April 2007. This Tribunal is now in recess. All rise. [All personnel depart the room.] CONVENINGAUTHORITY RH'.ORDER: (All personnel return into the room at 08:48.] All ri~c. PRESIDENT: This hearing will come to order.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 8: Columbus and the Brooklyn Bridge John Mueller June 3, 2011 Like Jose Padilla (Case 2), Iman Faris Is an American
    Case 8: Columbus and the Brooklyn Bridge 1 Case 8: Columbus and the Brooklyn Bridge John Mueller June 3, 2011 Like Jose Padilla (Case 2), Iman Faris is an American who for various reasons linked up with al-Qaeda before 9/11, met Osama bin Laden, and connected to the putative “mastermind” of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM). In early 2002, he was sent on a surveillance mission to the United States by KSM, and there seem to be two key episodes on this trip. First, he met with a couple of friends in August 2002 in a coffee shop near Columbus, Ohio. One of the men, outraged at the US attack on Afghanistan, suggested shooting up a local mall. Faris appears to have suggested that a bomb might be better, and the third man dismissed the idea as “stupid.” That was the Columbus mall plot: there was no followup whatever. Second, later in 2002, Faris traveled to New York City to scout out possible terrorist targets at the behest of KSM. Although most New Yorkers might proudly insist that their city is fairly festooned with lucrative targets, the only one Faris looked at was the Brooklyn Bridge. He drove over it once, noticed that there were quite a few cops around, thought the support cables too big or difficult to cut through, informed KSM of this profound discovery, and then, his curiosity and/or patience exhausted, drove back to Columbus. That was the Brooklyn Bridge plot: there was no followup whatever. The police presence at the bridge probably stemmed in part from the testimony-under-torture earlier in 2002 (see Case 2) of the captured al-Qaeda operative, Abu Zubayda, who suggested that al-Qaeda had the Brooklyn Bridge on a target list that also contained the Statute of Liberty and an undifferentiated array of shopping malls, banks, supermarkets, water systems, nuclear plants, and apartment buildings—none of which have actually been struck by any terrorists in the subsequent nine years in the United States, not even in Columbus, Ohio.
    [Show full text]
  • 30 Terrorist Plots Foiled: How the System Worked Jena Baker Mcneill, James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., and Jessica Zuckerman
    No. 2405 April 29, 2010 30 Terrorist Plots Foiled: How the System Worked Jena Baker McNeill, James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., and Jessica Zuckerman Abstract: In 2009 alone, U.S. authorities foiled at least six terrorist plots against the United States. Since Septem- ber 11, 2001, at least 30 planned terrorist attacks have Talking Points been foiled, all but two of them prevented by law enforce- • At least 30 terrorist plots against the United ment. The two notable exceptions are the passengers and States have been foiled since 9/11. It is clear flight attendants who subdued the “shoe bomber” in 2001 that terrorists continue to wage war against and the “underwear bomber” on Christmas Day in 2009. America. Bottom line: The system has generally worked well. But • President Obama spent his first year and a half many tools necessary for ferreting out conspiracies and in office dismantling many of the counterter- catching terrorists are under attack. Chief among them are rorism tools that have kept Americans safer, key provisions of the PATRIOT Act that are set to expire at including his decision to prosecute foreign ter- the end of this year. It is time for President Obama to dem- rorists in U.S. civilian courts, dismantlement of onstrate his commitment to keeping the country safe. Her- the CIA’s interrogation abilities, lackadaisical itage Foundation national security experts provide a road support for the PATRIOT Act, and an attempt map for a successful counterterrorism strategy. to shut down Guantanamo Bay. • The counterterrorism system that has worked successfully in the past must be pre- served in order for the nation to be successful In 2009, at least six planned terrorist plots against in fighting terrorists in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Conviction Are So Egregious That They Outweigh All Other Factors and Merit a Guidelines Sentence of Thirty Years' Imprisonment
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -v.- AHMED ABDEL SATrAR, et al., S102 Cr. 395 (JGK) Defendants. GOVERNMENT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM (REDACTED) MICHAEL J. GARCIA United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Attorney for the United States of America ANDREW S. DEMBER ROBIN L. BAKER IRIS LAN ANTHONY S. BARKOW CELESTE L. KOELEVELD Assistant United States Attorneys - Of Counsel - UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -v.- AHMED ABDEL SATTAR, et al., S102 Cr. 395 (JGK) Defendants. GOVERNMENT'S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM (REDACTED) MICHAEL J. GARCIA United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Attorney for the United States of America ANDREW S. DEMBER ROBIN L. BAKER IRIS LAN ANTHONY S. BARKOW CELESTE L. KOELEVELD Assistant United States Attorneys - Of Counsel - TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ARGUMENT ....................................................... 6 POINT I THE LAW REGARDING SENTENCING IN THE WAKE OF UNITED STATES v . BOOKER. 543 U.S. 220 (2005)' AND UNITED STATES v . CROSBY. 397 F.3d 103(2dCir.2005) ..................................................6 POINT I1 LYNNE STEWART SHOULD BE SENTENCED TO THIRTY YEARS' IMPRISONMENT ................................................15 A . The Nature And Circumstances Of Stewart's Offenses Of Conviction Are So Egregious That They Outweigh All Other Factors And Merit A Guidelines Sentence Of Thirty Years' Imprisonment ................ 16 1. Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman's Trial And Conviction .......... 16 2 . The Special Administrative Measures ......................17 3 . Stewart's Knowledge Of Abdel Rahman And The Islamic Group ................................................19 4 . Stewart's Criminal Conduct ..............................23 a . The March 1999 Prison Visit ....................... 23 b . The May 2000 Prison Visit .........................26 .
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio Terrorism N=30
    Terry Oroszi, MS, EdD Advanced Technical Intelligence Center ABC Boonshoft School of Medicine, WSU Henry Jackson Foundation, WPAFB The Dayton Think Tank, Dayton, OH Definitions of Terrorism International Terrorism Domestic Terrorism Terrorism “use or threatened use of “violent acts that are “the intent to instill fear, and violence to intimidate a dangerous to human life the goals of the terrorists population or government and and violate federal or state are political, religious, or thereby effect political, laws” ideological” religious, or ideological change” “Political, Religious, or Ideological Goals” The Research… #520 Charged (2001-2018) • Betim Kaziu • Abid Naseer • Ali Mohamed Bagegni • Bilal Abood • Adam Raishani (Saddam Mohamed Raishani) • Ali Muhammad Brown • Bilal Mazloum • Adam Dandach • Ali Saleh • Bonnell (Buster) Hughes • Adam Gadahn (Azzam al-Amriki) • Ali Shukri Amin • Brandon L. Baxter • Adam Lynn Cunningham • Allen Walter lyon (Hammad Abdur- • Brian Neal Vinas • Adam Nauveed Hayat Raheem) • Brother of Mohammed Hamzah Khan • Adam Shafi • Alton Nolen (Jah'Keem Yisrael) • Bruce Edwards Ivins • Adel Daoud • Alwar Pouryan • Burhan Hassan • Adis Medunjanin • Aman Hassan Yemer • Burson Augustin • Adnan Abdihamid Farah • Amer Sinan Alhaggagi • Byron Williams • Ahmad Abousamra • Amera Akl • Cabdulaahi Ahmed Faarax • Ahmad Hussam Al Din Fayeq Abdul Aziz (Abu Bakr • Amiir Farouk Ibrahim • Carlos Eduardo Almonte Alsinawi) • Amina Farah Ali • Carlos Leon Bledsoe • Ahmad Khan Rahami • Amr I. Elgindy (Anthony Elgindy) • Cary Lee Ogborn • Ahmed Abdel Sattar • Andrew Joseph III Stack • Casey Charles Spain • Ahmed Abdullah Minni • Anes Subasic • Castelli Marie • Ahmed Ali Omar • Anthony M. Hayne • Cedric Carpenter • Ahmed Hassan Al-Uqaily • Antonio Martinez (Muhammad Hussain) • Charles Bishop • Ahmed Hussein Mahamud • Anwar Awlaki • Christopher Lee Cornell • Ahmed Ibrahim Bilal • Arafat M.
    [Show full text]
  • Personnel Return Into the Room at 08:48 .) All Rise
    UNCLASSIFIED Verbatim Transcript of Combatant Status Review Tribunal Hearing for ISN 10020 OPENING PRESIDENT: Thishearingshallcome to order. RECORDER: This Tribunal is being conducted at 08:42 on 15 April 2007 on board U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba . The following personnel are present: Colonel [REDACTED ], States Air Force, President, Commander [ REDACTED ) , United States Navy, Member Lieutenant [REDACTED , United States Air Force , Member , Major [REDACTED ], United States Air Force, Personal Representative , Sergeant First Class REDACTED ), United Army, Reporter, Major [REDACTED ] United States Air Force, Recorder . Lieutenant Colonel [REDACTED is the Judge Advocate member of the Tribunal OATH SESSION 1 RECORDER: All rise PRESIDENT The Recorderwill be sworn. Do you, Major [ REDACTED), swear or affirm that you will faithfullyperform the duties as Recorder assigned in this Tribunal, so help you God ? RECORDER: I do. PRESIDENT: TheReporterwill nowbesworn. The Recorderwill administertheoath. RECORDER: Do you, Sergeant First Class REDACTED , that you will faithfully discharge your duties as Reporter assigned inthis Tribunal, so help you God? REPORTER I do PRESIDENT: We'll take a briefrecess while the Detainee is brought into the room. RECORDER: The time is 08:43 on 15 April 2007. This Tribunal is now in recess rise . [All personnel depart the room . CONVENING AUTHORITY RECORDER [All personnel return into the room at 08:48 .) All rise. PRESIDENT This hearing will come to order . You may be seated. Good morning. DETAINEE Good morning. How are you guys doing? ISN UNCLASSIFIED Enclosure 3) Page of39 UNCLASSIFIED PRESIDENT Very good , fine, thank you. This Tribunal is convened by order of the Director , Combatant Status Review Tribunals under the provisions of his Order of 12 February 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2020
    GW EXTREMISM TRACKER Program on Extremism TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY INDIVIDUALS HAVE BEEN CHARGED IN THE U.S. ON OFFENSES RELATED 204 to the Islamic State (also known as IS, ISIS, and ISIL) since March 2014, when the first arrests occurred. Of those: The average age of those charged is 39% 28 were accused of attempting to travel or successfully 90% are male traveled abroad. Their activities 31% were located in 29 states were accused of being and the District of Columbia involved in plots to carry out attacks on U.S. soil. 58% were charged in an operation involving an informant and/or an undercover agent. indicates law enforcement operation HAVE PLEADED OR THE AVERAGE LENGTH * 155 WERE FOUND GUILTY OF SENTENCE IN YEARS IS 13.4 *Uses 470 months for life sentences per the practice of the U.S. Sentencing Commission Faris has a projected release date of August 2020, at Legal Proceedings which point he may be subjected to removal (IS & Other Jihadist Groups) proceedings. Sources: DOJ Press Release, Faris Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Points, Faris Redacted Memorandum and Order, Faris IYMAN FARIS Judgment in a Civil Action FEB 4 50 IL NAYEF QASHOU A federal judge in the Southern District of Illinois entered an order revoking the naturalized U.S. FEB 11 AL citizenship of Iyman Faris. Faris was convicted in Nayef Qashou, a resident of Auburn, Alabama, 2003 of providing material support to al-Qaeda and pleaded guilty in the Middle District of Alabama to sentenced to 20 years in prison.
    [Show full text]
  • Attorney General Letter on Detention, Interrogation of Umar Farouk
    February 3, 2010 The Honorable Mitch McConnell United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator McConnell: I am writing in reply to your letter of January 26, 2010, inquiring about the decision to charge Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab with federal crimes in connection with the attempted bombing of Northwest Airlines Flight 253 near Detroit on December 25, 2009, rather than detaining him under the law of war. An identical response is being sent to the other Senators who joined in your letter. The decision to charge Mr. Abdulmutallab in federal court, and the methods used to interrogate him, are fully consistent with the long-established and publicly known policies and practices of the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the United States Government as a whole, as implemented for many years by Administrations of both parties. Those policies and practices, which were not criticized when employed by previous Administrations, have been and remain extremely effective in protecting national security. They are among the many powerful weapons this country can and should use to win the war against al-Qaeda. I am confident that, as a result of the hard work of the FBI and our career federal prosecutors, we will be able to successfully prosecute Mr. Abdulmutallab under the federal criminal law. I am equally confident that the decision to address Mr. Abdulmutallab's actions through our criminal justice system has not, and will not, compromise our ability to obtain information needed to detect and prevent future attacks. There are many examples of successful terrorism investigations and prosecutions, both before and after September 11, 2001, in which both of these important objectives have been achieved -- all in a manner consistent with our law and our national security interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Hatred at Home Family Here in Columbus, Your Travels Abroad Since You First Came to the United States
    Introduction The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, serve as constant, stark reminders that America has enemies in the world who seek to kill American men, women, and children, any way they can. Sometimes, the enemies are here at home. —Attorney General John Ashcroft, October 16, 2003, announcing plea agreements in the Portland Cell conspiracy t was still dark when Nuradin Mahamoud Abdi stepped out- I side his apartment on the North Side of Columbus, Ohio, around six o’clock on the morning of November 28, 2003. It was Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, one of the busiest days of the Christmas shopping season. Many others who were awake and leaving their houses at the same predawn hour were headed toward the malls and big-box stores like Target and Best Buy and Wal-Mart that were open hours early to accommodate the traditional Black Friday shoppers. Central Ohio’s outsized retail centers, especially Polaris to the north and Easton on the far east side, were sure to be jammed. By some estimates, greater Columbus has too many malls for its million-plus residents, a potential problem for some retailers but a boon, at least temporarily, for bargain hunters.1 Abdi, however, was going in the other direction, both literally and figuratively. As a Muslim, he had little reason to care about the frenzy of gift giving leading up to Christmas. Keys in hand, the So- mali native was still in his nightclothes, going out to warm up his car before leaving for early morning prayers at Masjid Ibn Taymia, a mosque catering to the city’s large Somali population.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Al-Shabaab's Attack at the Westgate
    NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS OF AL-SHABAAB’S ATTACK AT THE WESTGATE MALL IN NAIROBI, KENYA Page 1 of 34 Information current as of November 1, 2013 Important Note on Sources: This report and the conclusions it contains are based on information gathered by the NYPD and unclassified open source information. This report is subject to further revision based upon new information. For more information Please contact Lt. Kevin Yorke at [email protected] Page 2 of 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………… page 4 THE LOCATION: WESTGATE MALL……………………………… page 5 THE TERRORISTS: AL-SHABAAB…………………………………… page 12 TIMELINE OF EVENTS ……………………………………………… page 14 ANALYSIS OF ATTACK……………………………………………… page 27 Page 3 of 34 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overview: On Saturday, September 21, 2013 at approximately 12:30 hours (local East African Time) four terrorists associated with the Somali based terrorist organization Al-Shabaab launched an armed assault using rifles and hand grenades at the Westgate Shopping Mall in Nairobi, Kenya. The attack resulted in the deaths of 67 people and it took almost four days before authorities declared the scene safe. This terrorist attack was the largest loss of life in Kenya due to terrorism since the 1998 bombing of the US Embassy in Nairobi in which 212 people were killed. This high profile armed assault successfully raised Al-Shababb’s worldwide profile as a terrorist organization. It also clearly illustrates that armed assaults by terrorists on “soft” targets such as a shopping mall are a simple, effective and easy to copy tactic. The victims of this attack included males and females, ranging in age from 78 to eight years old and coming from 13 different countries.
    [Show full text]
  • 39 Terror Plots Foiled Since 9/11: Examining Counterterrorism's
    No. 2556 May 20, 2011 39 Terror Plots Foiled Since 9/11: Examining Counterterrorism’s Success Stories Jena Baker McNeill, James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., and Jessica Zuckerman Abstract: The Heritage Foundation began tracking foiled terror plots against the U.S. in 2007—counting at least 19 foiled plots since 9/11. Today, that count stands at 39 Talking Points plots against the U.S. foiled—thanks overwhelmingly to • Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, the Bush-era policies of enhanced information sharing 2001, at least 39 terror plots against the Unit- and intelligence gathering. Three Heritage national secu- ed States have been foiled. rity experts summarize the data, explain the lessons that • These successes, coupled with the death of Americans should learn from the anti-terror successes, and Osama bin Laden, serve as a reminder that delineate essential principles that American policymakers the war on terrorism is not over, and as a call should follow to continue to protect this country and its to focus on strategies that have made the citizens. nation a harder target for terrorism, while examining which reforms are still necessary. • Several lessons on how to stop terror plots Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in their earliest stages can be extrapolated at least 39 terror plots against the United States have from the data. been foiled thanks to domestic and international coop- • Continuing America’s success in fighting ter- eration, as well as efforts to track down terror leads in rorism while preserving national prosperity local communities. Such a successful track record of and individual freedoms requires a dedica- preventing terror attacks should garner the attention tion by Congress and the executive branch of policymakers around the country as both Congress to risk-based security focused on informa- and the Administration wrestle with the difficult deci- tion sharing and intelligence gathering.
    [Show full text]