T5 B50 Hijacker Primary Docs- Ua 175 1 Of 2 Fdr- Alshehhi Tab- 2-11-03 Memo- Dos Ig Interview Of Officer Issued Visa To Marwan Al Shehhi 356

  • Uploaded by: 9/11 Document Archive
  • 0
  • 0
  • May 2020
  • PDF

This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA


Overview

Download & View T5 B50 Hijacker Primary Docs- Ua 175 1 Of 2 Fdr- Alshehhi Tab- 2-11-03 Memo- Dos Ig Interview Of Officer Issued Visa To Marwan Al Shehhi 356 as PDF for free.

More details

  • Words: 1,191
  • Pages: 4
9/11 Working-level Employee SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED DEPARTMENT OF STATE UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY

Office of Inspector General Memorandum of Conversation Visas for the 9/11 Hijackers

SA-39. 7th flr. Conf. Rm.

Subject

2/11/03

Office

I

I

Date

Bert Krieg and Kevin Hrvnkow

Official

Inspector

Mr. Krieg stated that the purpose of the interview was to respond to a congressional request that OIG report on visa issuance to 9/11 hijackers. He added that OIG will protect the identities of the adjudicators and that OIG's response will not single out specific individuals. I

|read the questions for the visa adjudicators given to her and answered them as follows.

I. For the record, please tell me your name, present rank and position.

2. Were you the officer (or consular associate) who issued nonimmigrant visas to (names of applicants) on (dates) at (name of post)? l lexamined the computerized consular consolidated database visa file of Marwan Al Shehhi who was issued an NIV on Jan. 18,2000 atTDubai, UAE.) Yes.

3. Is this a copy of the application? No, it was apparently purged along with all the others, as was the standard destruction procedure. Refusals were only kept two years, while issuances were purged after one year. Since this visa was issued 18 Jan 00, it would have been destroyed by Jan 2001. 4. Did you check the CLASS lookout system for his name, and what were the results? Yes, the record shows that I did, and that there were no "hits." 5. Did you interview this individual prior to issuing the visa?

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED I can't tell from the record in front of me, but most probably not. I would guess that about 95 percent of the Emiratis (this fellow was a U.A.E. national) were not interviewed. 6. If not, why not? He was a U.A.E. national and they were almost never interviewed unless we got a "hit" on the CLASS lookout system indicating derogatory information about the applicant. 7. What was the policy at post regarding personal appearance waivers? See no. 6 above. I was the only full time visa officer at a post issuing about 30,000 visas a year. This was an incredible workload and I could not possibly have interviewed more visa applicants. Emiratis were low risk visa applicants who had lots of money, left the U. A.E. to escape the summers, and were Western oriented who simply wanted to visit the U.S. There was little fear of Emiratis overstaying their visits. There were separate visa processing policies for U.A.E nationals, TCN (third country nationals) residents, and TCN visitors. The latter were screened most carefully since they were the most likely to overstay in the U.S. 8. How were you informed of this policy? In writing? Orally? By whom? Probably it was done verbally. I don't recall seeing anything in writing. 9. Were you personally given any instructions by your supervisors or superiors about asking applicants to appear in person for an interview? Nothing specific, other than for Emirate nationals. We were very aware of the desire of Embassy Abu Dhabi's senior management to keep the Emirate nationals happy. They were low risk visa applicants with a lot of wealth and always returned to the Emirates. They were also pro-Western in their attitudes. We also had personal appearance waivers for applicants requiring medical treatment in the U.S. and for economic reasons. 10. Did a travel agency submit the case? No. The travel agency procedure was not in place at that time.

11. If so, what was the policy at post regarding travel agency procedures? N/A 12. How were you informed of this policy? In writing? Orally? By whom? N/A 13. Would a personal interview of this applicant have helped you decide his eligibility for a visa, and why? No, because of the way the culture and society worked over there. They all had substantial evidence of their wealth and ties to local business enterprises. Unless, there were some magic set SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED of questions that would uncover someone's true intentions, a personal interview would most likely not reveal anything that the person wouldn't want you to know. I am not sure that more visa officers would have helped to identify terrorists. What questions should they ask and what documents should they examine? 14. If you interviewed this individual, what details can you recall? N/A 15. Did he present any documents in support of his application? N/A 16. If so, can you recall any details of the documents that were presented? I can't recall. 17. What specific elements obtained from the interview or the application convinced you that this applicant was entitled to a visa? N/A 18. Did you have sufficient time to conduct the interview or review the application to your satisfaction? If not, how much time would you have preferred? N/A 19. If there were sufficient consular officers at post to conduct personal interviews of every visa applicant, would there have been sufficient interview windows, work space and support staff? No, Dubai had a poor consular section physical set up; it was not set-up for efficiency. 20. What other elements would have helped you make a better decision regarding the applicant's eligibility for a visa and why?

9/11 Law Enforcement Sensitive

Also, if I had a better, accurate picture of the host country it would have been helpful. 21. Did your superiors ever discuss the post's NIV refusal rates in general with you?

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED

9/11 Working-level Employee SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED No - the only time UAE nationals were refused, was because of CLASS. We had an incredibly low refusal rate. 22. Did your superiors ever counsel you to raise or lower your own refusal rate? No. 23. Did you or anyone in the consular section conduct NTV return validation studies? If not, why not? No. There was little or no interest in doing so for the Emiratis. We also had no negative feedback from the INS. 24. How well did you speak and read Arabic? None. If I needed to interview in Arabic I used a FSN translator, but this was difficult because it added time to the visa process. 25. Did the Department train you in this language? No. 26. Do you consider that the training you received in the Department to carry out your visa adjudication responsibilities was adequate?

Yes, but the emphasis was on screening out economic immigrants and not on the big picture or specifically much on terrorism, f \. If not, what ad

'; 4

I

I had no overlap with my predecessor. More knowledge of the local culture, society and traditions would have helped. I could have used better training about Arabic naming conventions and the transliteration of Arabic names into English. 28. What other comments would you like to make at this time regarding this visa case? The U.A.E. was under consideration for inclusion into the Visa Waiver Program because of the very low refusal rate for its nationals. This would have had a major impact on our workload.

9/11 Law Enforcement Sensitive

J They shed little light on he applicant's intentions.

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED

Related Documents


More Documents from "9/11 Document Archive"