![]() |
| Photo by Joe Goldberg. |
By James Henry
It’s the mission of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to let good people into the country and keep the bad ones out.
So why does CBP have a “hands-off” list that exempts certain people with apparent connections to terrorism from secondary screening at airports?
Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley didn’t know either, until his staff obtained an exchange of internal CBP e-mails that reveal the existence of such a list, and the CBP’s concern about one man in particular whose name was redacted.
They have good reason to be concerned. The mystery traveler is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood with indirect ties to Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. He has also sued DHS twice.
In the e-mail exchange, one CBP official writes—with an evident degree of shock—that the border agency will be unable to stop the man from entering the country:
I’m puzzled how someone could be a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, be an associate of [redacted], say that the US is staging car bombings in Iraq and that [it] is ok for men to beat their wives, question who was behind the 9/11 attacks, and be afforded the luxury of a visitor visa and de-watchlisted.”
Grassley—a longtime critic of government abuses and overreaching—was also baffled. So, in his capacity as the ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Grassley asked Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson to explain
DHS Responds. No, Wait. CBP Does. Sort of
Johnson didn’t explain. Instead he delegated the task to Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske. In his letter to Grassley, Kerlikowske denies the existence of the “hands off” list and, avoiding the main thrust of the inquiry, provides a general description of CBP’s protocols and the limits of its authority.
He explains that the separate Terrorist Watchlist—not the “hands off” list—is run by the FBI under the authority of the Attorney General. In other words, it’s not CBP’s problem.
Read More



No comments:
Post a Comment