SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: BigBull who wrote (34118)7/10/2002 10:23:12 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
From WSJ.com "Best of the Web"

What's Wrong With This Picture?

"U.S. Deported 131 Pakistanis in Secret Airlift"--Washington Post, July 10

"71 Arabs Received Fake Visas [in Qatar] Prior to 9/11"--United Press International, July 10

"Immigration Policy to Bar Canadian and Mexican Part-Time Students"--New York Times, July 9

"Saudis Get Easy Access to Visas"--Washington Times, July 10

-------------------------------------------------------------

Ideology: Now You See It, Now You Don't

In May 2000, the Associated Press published a dispatch about a Judicial Watch lawsuit against Bill Clinton. The dispatch twice referred to Judicial Watch as a "conservative group."

Yesterday the AP published a dispatch on a threatened Judicial Watch lawsuit against Dick Cheney. The dispatch makes no reference to the group's ideology, calling it only "a Washington-based watchdog group."



To: BigBull who wrote (34118)7/10/2002 10:52:45 PM
From: ThirdEye  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Well, at least it appears that AI has not gone the way of the Red Cross.



To: BigBull who wrote (34118)7/10/2002 11:18:09 PM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 281500
 
Looks like "Visa Express" finally hit the end of the line. From "NRO"

Visa Express Axed
The State Department acts.

Visa Express is finally on the way out. Word of this breaking, and encouraging, development comes as Congress is considering proposals to remove the visa-issuance powers from their current home in the State Department and as the investigation of Middle Eastern men buying illegal visas becomes public.

Bowing to a month's worth of criticism of the program that let in three of the Sept. 11 hijackers in the three months it was in operation in Saudi Arabia before 9/11, the officials in charge of the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh have requested permission to shut down Visa Express.

A confidential memo from the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh yesterday disclosed that within the next week, the U.S. embassy in Riyadh and U.S. Consulate in Jeddah will "move toward interviewing all adult applicants and toward eliminating the role of travel agencies in forwarding visa applications to the Embassy and Consulate."

Additionally, the head of Consular Affairs (CA), the agency within the State Department that oversees consulates and visa issuance, Mary Ryan, is also on the way out. Mary Ryan has been CA chief for nine years, and in that time she implemented a dangerous "courtesy culture" and has scrapped the interview requirement for visa applicants in consulates around the world. According to a senior administration official, "Undersecretary of State Grant Green [Ryan's boss] called Mary Ryan into his office, and he told her it was time she resign."

The news of the departure of both Visa Express and Mary Ryan comes on the same day that two congressional committees are scheduled to vote on bills that would decide the ultimate fate of visa-issuance powers, whether such authority stays with the State Department or moves over to the new Department of Homeland Security. Although the State Department had no official comment last night, several other sources confirmed Mary Ryan's exit.

It's unlikely that the timing of Mary Ryan's exit one day before congressional action was coincidental. "This was Powell's way of saying, 'I can do better.' This is a huge turf war for him [to keep visa issuance], and he's playing for keeps," comments a senior administration official. Congress shouldn't fall for the head-fake, because the problems plaguing visa issuance go much deeper than just Visa Express or Mary Ryan.

Evidence of the corrosion of the visa-issuance process came to the surface again yesterday, with multiple news reports of massive visa fraud at the U.S. Embassy in Doha, Qatar. Reports on "Operation Eagle Strike" note that authorities are investigating the possible illegal sale of up to 70 visas to mostly Middle Eastern men for $10,000 each. So far 31 holders of the fraudulent visas have been arrested.

The Qatar visa-selling scandal is hardly an isolated incident, however. Just last month, former consular officer Thomas Carroll was sentenced to 21 years in prison for selling up to 800 visas for $10,000 to $15,000 each in Guyana. According to prosecutors in his case, at least 26 of those who purchased illegal visas committed crimes in the United States, ranging from disorderly conduct to gang rape. The scariest part of the story is that Carroll was only caught because he was dumb enough to encourage his successor to continue his scheme. If the successor had gone along with Carroll, or simply chosen not to tip off authorities, Carroll might have gotten off.

Just this April, the Dallas Morning News reported that the U.S. Consulate in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, was under FBI investigation for the illegal sale of visas, following the conviction that month of a consular officer for accepting bribes over several years. This March, a former Drug Enforcement Agency agent was convicted of fraud and bribery for helping several Nigerians acquire fraudulent non-immigrant visas.

If the purchasers of these illegal visas had been terrorists, or worse yet suicide bombers, the damage could have already been done before investigators even knew the visas had been sold.

As the new evidence on Qatar is making disturbingly clear, State has been incapable of closing off gaping loopholes in our border security. Would transferring the visa-issuance powers to Homeland Security be a panacea? No, but anything would have to be better than the untenable situation that now exists.

Given that all 19 of the 9/11 hijackers came here on legal visas, no function could be more central to homeland security than keeping terrorists from reaching our shores in the first place. Having consular officers who have received less than five hours of total interview training conducting cursory, two-to-three minute interviews of less than half of visa applicants is not just absurd ? it's an obvious threat to our border security.

Officials at State still refuse to acknowledge any problems with the way they conduct business. They were defending Visa Express as recently as Monday, still clinging to the belief that there was no security threat in deputizing private Saudi travel agents to handle the first step in the visa-screening process.

The fact that State doesn't understand that every contact with a possible bad guy is important shows that that department just doesn't get it. U.S. Customs agents, for example, often catch drug mules simply because someone looks nervous or antsy, triggering follow-up interviews. With visa applicants dropping off applications at travel agents, not to mention more than half of the time not being interviewed at all, consular officers are denied crucial opportunities to screen out those wishing to do us harm.

The people in the field in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia don't get it, either. The confidential memo requesting termination of Visa Express blames the demise of the program on "uninformed media reports," never mentioning that three 9/11 terrorists gained entry to the United States through the program in just three months. The author, Ambassador Robert Jordan, offered the following reasoning for his decision: "I must be concerned with... the perception of what we are doing." The "perception" was not the problem; the reality was. In the country that sent us 15 of 19 9/11 terrorists, people were still, post-Sept. 11, submitting visa applications to travel agents ? and State saw nothing wrong with this.

The elimination of Visa Express and the exodus of Mary Ryan are heartening, but are only the first step. CA's house must be thoroughly cleaned, since "all of the people there are Mary Ryan's people, and all the policies are her policies," notes a senior administration official.

The only effective method for cleaning house is to rid CA of her cronies and transfer the visa-issuance powers to the law enforcement-focused Department of Homeland Security. The latter action, though, faces stiff opposition from Secretary of State Colin Powell, who is determined to maintain the clout associated with visa powers. Congressional committee votes today and tomorrow are the next battleground, with the ad hoc committee, headed by Majority Leader Dick Armey, taking up Homeland Security issues next week.

Because Powell goes to bat for the bureaucrats in his charge, he will likely pull out all the stops to hold onto the visa-issuance powers. In trying to keep the visa-issuance function within his department, Powell may be fighting for bureaucrats whose livelihoods are on the line, but it's American lives that are at risk.

Joel Mowbray is an NRO contributor and a Townhall.com columnist.



To: BigBull who wrote (34118)7/11/2002 9:19:56 AM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Well, I'll be damned. Never thought I'd see that bit of information. Are you sure it is not a bad joke?



To: BigBull who wrote (34118)7/11/2002 1:47:49 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Respond to of 281500
 
The Israeli blogger Tal G. has an interesting comment on the Amnesty International report:

Posted 12:39 PM by Tal G
From today's satirical "Last Word" program on Army Radio:

Irit: Amnesty International has issued a 70-pg. report in which they say that Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians constitute crimes against humanity....

Uri: "Yesss!"

Irit: Put aside your "Yesss" and "Wo-ho" for a second...

Uri: What this means is that, until now, when we opposed our getting killed we were considered to be an "interested party". Now people are coming along and actually saying that it's wrong to kill us....

Previously, Amnesty seemed to give express only token criticism of Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians. Why have things changed? A couple of months ago we were on the verge on being treated as pariahs and Arafat was being handed everything on a plate.

Whereas now: the EU is not saying too much about Operation Determined Path and is pushing for PA reform, and humanitarian organizations are suddenly discovering PA corruption and getting disturbed about Israeli victims. Not to be too optimistic - there's still lots of people like Chris Patten and Mona Baker around - but something has changed..

Is it simply the Bush speech? If the answer is yes, then it shows how much the situation revolves around realpolitik rather than principle.

This just in: The PA calls the Amnesty report "biased and unbalanced" (details). From the article, it's clear what they really mean: in their view, their situation justifies any and all behaviour. The PA and the other organizations mentioned seem unable to relate to the doctrine that murder of civilians in simply wrong.
talg.blogspot.com