Category Archives: Department of Homeland Security

9/11, 18 Years Later

Posted on by

It is a solemn day for sure. It is a day where memories begin to fade and for some there are no memories at all. The ‘Never Again’ must be taught and understood to those that were not yet born at the time or too younger to comprehend the details.
But, America, don’t be sad. Each year that passes from that struck the hearts and souls of America, we have come to learn more and America DID prove how resolute and resilient we actually are as citizens. Those attributes are to be celebrated. Sure, we have given up too many freedoms to prevent another such attack. Our way of life did change forever that day, yet for the victims of 9/11 and those so near to all that occurred that day and for all the days that followed, many of their lives changed in often unspeakable ways.

A firefighter at the site of the World Trade Centre in New York on September 11 2001 photo
This is a time to review what has past to ensure it is not dismissed as a distant chapter in American history.

On September 11, 2001–a clear, sunny, late summer day–al Qaeda terrorists aboard three hijacked passenger planes carried out coordinated suicide attacks against the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., killing everyone on board the planes and nearly 3,000 people on the ground. A fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, killing all on board, after passengers and crew attempted to wrest control from the hijackers.

***

JAKARTA — The plot to blow up several airliners over the Atlantic, uncovered by British authorities, bears a striking, if not eerie, resemblance to a plot hatched 12 years ago to simultaneously blow up a dozen airliners over the Pacific.

That scheme was developed in Manila by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was starting his climb to become a top lieutenant to Osama bin Laden, and Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, who was a mastermind of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Philippine investigators came to believe that the Manila operation was financed by Bin Laden.

Mohammed code-named the operation Bojinka, which was widely reported to have been adopted from Serbo-Croatian, meaning big bang. But Mohammed has told his C.I.A. interrogators that it was just a “nonsense word” he adopted after hearing it when he was fighting in Afghanistan during the war against the Soviet Union, according to “The 9/11 Commission Report.” Mohammed was seized in Pakistan in 2003, and is now being held by the CIA at an undisclosed location.

The Bojinka plot in 1995 was anything but nonsense. At an apartment in Manila, Yousef began mixing chemicals, which he planned to put into containers that would be carried on board airliners, much like the plotters in Britain are alleged to have been planning.

In those days, it would have been relatively easy to get liquid explosives past a checkpoint. Mohammed and Yousef, according to the 9/11 Commission, studied airline schedules and planned to sneak the liquid on a dozen planes headed to Seoul, South Korea, and Hong Kong and then on to the United States. The idea was that the bombs, complete with timing devices, would be left on the airliners, but that the plotters would disembark at a stop before detonating the devices.

To rehearse the operations, a practice bomb was detonated in a Manila theater late in 1994. Another bomb was concealed aboard Philippine Airlines Flight 434 from Manila to Tokyo 10 days later. The bomb exploded on the way to Tokyo, killing a passenger, but the pilot managed to land the damaged 747. American prosecutors later concluded that Yousef had taken a liquid explosive onto the plane before disembarking.

The plot, however, was foiled in early 1995 when a fire broke out in the apartment where some of the conspirators were working. Among the things found when the police investigated was Yousef’s laptop, with a file named “Bojinka.” They also found dolls with clothes containing nitrocellulose, according to the 9/11 Commission.

Yousef was captured in Pakistan, turned over to the United States, convicted in New York and sentenced to life without parole.

According to investigators, Yousef’s specialty was making bombs from innocuous-looking objects that could be smuggled through airport security – a digital wristwatch modified to serve as a timer, or a plastic bottle for contact lens solution filled with liquid components for nitroglycerine.

When questioned after his arrest, Yousef refused to explain precisely how he had planned to carry out the bombings, according to testimony at his trial for the Bojinka plot.

Brian Parr, a Secret Service agent, testified at the trial that under questioning Yousef made clear that other terrorists were aware of the explosive technique, and he did not want to compromise their ability to carry out similar acts.

“He said that he didn’t want us to have knowledge of the techniques that they were going to use,” Parr testified, “because it may help us prevent other people from using those techniques.”

And Yousef, in his statement to Parr, made clear that he had carefully analyzed how to carry explosives through airline security.

For example, when questioned about one chemical mixture that could be used in explosives, Yousef said he would not have used it because it could have “been easily detected by airport security screening,” Parr testified.

Parr said that Yousef “specifically said that he would have used a different type of device that even the most sophisticated bomb-screening machines would not have been able to detect.”

Mary Jo White, the former United States attorney whose office successfully investigated and prosecuted Yousef in the Bojinka plot, recalled: “It was frightening. There were people wandering the globe able to do this. And that was 10 years ago.”

Mohammed has told his interrogators that after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which involved explosives loaded onto a truck that failed to bring down the building, he “needed to graduate to a more novel form of attack,” as the 9/11 report puts it. That led to Bojinka, and the first thoughts about using planes to bomb the World Trade Center.

***

To hear the 2 hours of audio of the FAA, NORAD and American Airlines, click here.

"The activity was so high and things were happening so quickly ... there wasn't any time to be afraid." - Nic Calio photo

September 11, 2001
Hijackers crash two airliners into the World Trade Center in New York. A third strikes the Pentagon, and a fourth crashes in a field in rural Pennsylvania. More than 3,000 people are killed in the terror attacks.

September 13, 2001
The White House announces that there is “overwhelming evidence” that Osama bin Laden is behind the attacks.

September 14, 2001
Congress authorizes [PDF; requires free Adobe Reader] President George W. Bush to use “all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

September 16, 2001
Osama bin Laden denies any involvement in the 9/11 attacks in a statement to Al Jazeera television, saying, “I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons.”

September 18, 2001
The Justice Department publishes an interim regulation allowing non-citizens suspected of terrorism to be detained without charge for 48 hours or “an additional reasonable period of time” in the event of an “emergency or other extraordinary circumstance.” The new rule is used to hold hundreds indefinitely until the USA Patriot Act passes in October.

September 20, 2001
President Bush announces the new cabinet-level Office of Homeland Security, to be led by Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge. Ridge later becomes secretary of a new Homeland Security Department.

In an address to a joint session of Congress, President Bush declares, “Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.”

British Prime Minister Tony Blair meets with President George Bush at the White House. According to former British Ambassador Sir Christopher Meyer, who also attended the dinner, Bush indicates that he is determined to remove Saddam Hussein from power: “We must deal with this first. But when we have dealt with Afghanistan, we must come back to Iraq.”

October 2, 2001
The USA Patriot Act [PDF; requires free Adobe Reader] is introduced in Congress.

October 4, 2001
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, speaking before an emergency session of Parliament, says that three of the 19 9/11 hijackers have been positively identified as “known associates” of Osama bin Laden.

October 5, 2001
A photographer for the tabloid newspaper The Sun dies of inhalation anthrax in Boca Raton, Florida. Over the next several weeks, along with several false alarms, four other letters containing anthrax are received, by NBC News, the New York Post, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) and Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). Eleven people are infected; five people die.

October 5, 2001
One thousand soldiers from the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division are sent to the Central Asian nation of Uzbekistan, which borders Afghanistan.

October 7, 2001
The U.S. begins bombing Afghanistan. In a televised address, President Bush tells the nation: “On my orders, the United States military has begun strikes against al Qaeda terrorist training camps and military installations of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. These carefully targeted actions are designed to disrupt the use of Afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations, and to attack the military capability of the Taliban regime.”

October 24, 2001
The House of Representatives passes the final version of the USA Patriot Act [PDF; requires free Adobe Reader].

October 26, 2001
President Bush signs the USA Patriot Act [PDF; requires free Adobe Reader] into law.
Learn more about the USA Patriot Act: Flashpoints USA – Sacrifices of Security

November 5, 2001
The Justice Department announces that it has put 1,182 people into secret custody since 9/11. Nearly all of them are from the Middle East or South Asia.

November 21, 2001
Speaking at a Thanksgiving dinner for troops and their families at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, President Bush states, “Afghanistan is just the beginning on the war against terror. There are other terrorists who threaten America and our friends, and there are other nations willing to sponsor them. We will not be secure as a nation until all of these threats are defeated. Across the world and across the years, we will fight these evil ones, and we will win.”

December 11, 2001
In the first criminal indictments stemming from the 9/11 attacks, Zacarias Moussaoui, a French citizen of Moroccan descent, is charged with conspiring with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to “murder thousands of people” in New York, the Pentagon, and Pennsylvania.

The House International Relations Committee drafts House Joint Resolution 75, which states that if Iraq refuses to allow U.N. inspectors to investigate freely in Iraq, the refusal will constitute an “act of aggression against the United States.” The bill is sponsored by Representatives Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Porter Goss (R-FL) and Henry Hyde (R-IL).

December 13, 2001
The U.S. Army responds to an investigation by the Baltimore Sun and confirms that it has been making weapons grade anthrax in recent years, in violation of an international treaty.

December 17, 2001
The Northern Alliance defeats Taliban forces in the battle of Tora Bora, eliminating the last major pocket of Taliban resistance and effectively ending the Afghan war.

December 22, 2001
British citizen Richard Reid is arrested for allegedly trying to blow up a Miami-bound jet using explosives hidden in his shoe. He later pleads guilty to all charges, and declares himself a follower of Osama bin Laden.

January 23, 2002
Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, in Karachi, Pakistan to investigate the case of alleged shoe bomber Richard Reid, is kidnapped while on his way to meet a source. A group calling itself the National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty claims responsibility and demands the release of all Pakistani terror detainees and the release of a halted shipment of F-16 fighter jets to the Pakistani government. A videotape of Pearl’s murder surfaces on February 23, and his body is discovered in a shallow grave on the outskirts of Karachi on May 16.

January 29, 2002
In his State of the Union address, President Bush describes an “axis of evil” between Iraq, Iran and North Korea. Osama bin Laden is not mentioned in the speech.

February 6, 2002
In a Senate hearing CIA Director George Tenet denies that there was any 9/11 intelligence failure, and states that the 9/11 plot was “in the heads of three or four people” and thus nearly impossible to prevent. He tells the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence “our major near-term concern is the possibility that Saddam might gain access to fissile material, . . . [and] with substantial foreign assistance, [Iraq] could flight-test a longer-range ballistic missile within the next five years.”

February 12, 2002
Testifying before the Senate Budget Committee, Secretary of State Colin Powell states: “With respect to Iraq, it’s long been, for several years now, a policy of the United States’ government that regime change would be in the best interest of the region, the best interest of the Iraqi people. And we’re looking at a variety of options that would bring that about.”

March 19, 2002
Testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee, CIA Director George Tenet claims that there are links between Iraq and al Qaeda: “There is no doubt that there have been (Iraqi) contacts and linkages to the al Qaeda organization. As to where we are on September 11, the jury is still out. As I said carefully in my statement, it would be a mistake to dismiss the possibility of state sponsorship whether Iranian or Iraqi and we’ll see where the evidence takes us.”

May 5, 2002
Appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” Secretary of State Colin Powell says, “The United States reserves its option to do whatever it believes might be appropriate to see if there can be a regime change…. U.S. policy is that regardless of what the inspectors do, the people of Iraq and the people of the region would be better off with a different regime in Baghdad.”

May 20-24, 2002
The Bush administration issues an unprecedented series of terror warnings. Vice President Cheney warns it is “not a matter of if, but when” al Qaeda will next attack the U.S., a warning repeated by Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says that terrorists will “inevitably” obtain weapons of mass destruction, and FBI Director Mueller says more suicide bombings are “inevitable.” Authorities also issue separate warnings that al Qaeda terrorists might target apartment buildings nationwide, banks, rail and transit systems, the Statue of Liberty, and the Brooklyn Bridge.

June 1, 2002
In a speech to the graduating class at West Point, President Bush announces a new U.S. policy of preemptive military action: “If we wait for threats to fully materialize we will have waited too long. We must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans and confront the worst threats before they emerge.” This preemptive strategy is included in a defensive strategic paper the next month, and formally announced in September 2002. More here.

There of course is so much more to know, yet this timeline will help teach the facts and context. Citizens have a duty. Share, remember and explain.

 

FBI’s Terror Watch List Ruled Unconstitutional

Posted on by

Swell eh? This case was brought into Federal court by the Muslim ‘civil rights’ group CAIR, Council for American Islamic Relations.

The watchlist is disseminated to a variety of governmental departments, foreign governments and police agencies. Among the defendants named in the lawsuit were the heads of the Terrorist Screening Center, the FBI, the National Counterterrorism Center, the TSA, and CBP.

The judge said he was seeking additional legal briefs before deciding what remedy to impose, and wanted both sides to explain “what kind of remedy can be fashioned to adequately protect a citizen’s constitutional rights while not unduly compromising public safety or national security.”

The plaintiffs said that they were wrongly placed on the list, and that the government’s process for adding names is overbroad and riddled with errors.

The FBI declined comment on the ruling. More here.

 

Terror Watchlist Opinion by Law&Crime on Scribd

It is important to note there are flaws associated with the list, yet it is not meant to be a permanent list, in fact people are removed. The list is a guidance document requiring all associated agencies to review, investigate and amend as required.

It is a security tool and as for traveling and being detained, there are remedies as noted below”

The Department of Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP) is a single point of contact for individuals who have inquiries or seek resolution regarding difficulties they experienced during their travel screening at transportation hubs – like airports – or crossing U.S. borders.

This includes:

  • watch list issues
  • screening problems at ports of entry
  • situations where travelers believe they have been unfairly or incorrectly delayed, denied boarding or identified for additional screening at our nation’s transportation hubs

We cannot overlook the historical facts of militant Islam and the condition that the United States is still at war with terror factions. Further, the U.S. Justice system still prosecutes and applies prison terms to those that are found guilty of proven ties to terrorism, human trafficking, foreign criminal cases and more.

For reference the Watchlisting Guidance is below for reference. It is unknown whether this is the most current iteration of guidance, but it is good for reference. Gotta wonder if this Federal judge was presented with details, context, cases and background.

 

2013 Watchlist Guidance by juan_de_herat on Scribd

 

 

California Strikes Down Police Assistance Law

Posted on by

California has now driven a larger divide between the public and law enforcement. You can bet a few other states may follow the same tactic.

California’s new law drives a major wedge between police and the public (Photo – Screenshot – YouTube)

If you saw an officer in need of help… what would you do?

Most people would step in and offer assistance… no questions asked.

But in California’s latest move to further the divide between the police and the public, citizens would now be legally allowed to refuse to help a police officer who needs assistance.

Governor Gavin Newsom signed their newest anti-police bill into law on Tuesday, the Sacramento Bee reported. State leaders have said that it now allows citizens to avoid “an untenable moral dilemma.”

Moral dilemma? From assisting an officer with an arrest if he’s in need of help?  We get it. Maybe there shouldn’t be a fine or a jail sentence associated with choosing to not get involved. Perhaps the original law from the 1870’s is a bit outdated.

But what is this bill really saying?

Essentially, it’s driving a bigger wedge between officers and civilians.

People now are essentially told to let a cop fend for himself if he’s being overpowered by a dangerous victim. It affirms the decision to stand by and film or watch while a hero’s life is in danger.

The new bill would get rid of the old law – the California Posse Comitatus Act of 1872, which required a civilian to step in and assist an officer during an arrest if necessary. For those who ‘violated’ it, they could face up to a $1,000 fine.

9,999 times out of 10,000… an officer isn’t going to ask for an untrained bystander to step in and help. But sometimes it’s necessary… and it could mean the difference between life and death.

Let’s look at this objectively.

How many people were ever really charged with this misdemeanor? What Governor Newsom did was remind everyone that they have a choice — and basically push them to make the choice to carry on with their lives instead of getting involved.

Our question is… if this law had simply remained the way it was, how many people would have chosen to step in and help when they saw another human in need?

And how big of a drop-off rate would we see now that this bill is being pushed in the public eye? Will people see a police officer being attacked and because they don’t like cops, they choose to stand there and watch him die?

It brings back memories of the time when a bystander chose to broadcast an officer’s death to Facebook Live instead of putting down the phone and doing what they could to help.

Is this the country we want to live in?

Will protesters and anti-police ‘activists’ feel even more emboldened by their supposed morals?

The California State Sheriff’s Association said they were “unconvinced that this statute should be repealed.”

Of course. Though it may have stemmed from the days of slavery… this law is ultimately about doing what’s right and assisting a public servant in their time of need. Read more here.

 

Feds Prepare States for Foreign Voting Interference

Posted on by

The Democrats have really lost their argument against voter ID if they are being fully candid about foreign interference. It is without question that several cities and states are victims of ransomware and Florida is especially concerned. Remember that a foreign actor, where clues point to Russia were able to gain access to voter registration databases and it stands to reason China will attempt the same.

Continually, the Democrats say that the Trump administration is virtually doing nothing to protect the election system. Read on as the Democrats know the mission and actions of the Cyber division of the Department of Homeland Security.

Image result for foreign hackers us voting systems photo
As Reuters reports:

The U.S. government plans to launch a program in roughly one month that narrowly focuses on protecting voter registration databases and systems ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

These systems, which are widely used to validate the eligibility of voters before they cast ballots, were compromised in 2016 by Russian hackers seeking to collect information. Intelligence officials are concerned that foreign hackers in 2020 not only will target the databases but attempt to manipulate, disrupt or destroy the data, according to current and former U.S. officials.

“We assess these systems as high risk,” said a senior U.S. official, because they are one of the few pieces of election technology regularly connected to the Internet.

The Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA, a division of the Homeland Security Department, fears the databases could be targeted by ransomware, a type of virus that has crippled city computer networks across the United States, including recently in Texas, Baltimore and Atlanta.

“Recent history has shown that state and county governments and those who support them are targets for ransomware attacks,” said Christopher Krebs, CISA’s director. “That is why we are working alongside election officials and their private sector partners to help protect their databases and respond to possible ransomware attacks.”

A ransomware attack typically locks an infected computer system until payment, usually in the form of cryptocurrency, is sent to the hacker.

The effort to counter ransomware-style cyberattacks aimed at the election runs parallel to a larger intelligence community directive to determine the most likely vectors of digital attack in the November 2020 election, according to current and former U.S. officials.

“It is imperative that states and municipalities limit the availability of information about electoral systems or administrative processes and secure their websites and databases that could be exploited,” the FBI said in a statement, supporting the Homeland Security initiative.

CISA’s program will reach out to state election officials to prepare for such a ransomware scenario. It will provide educational material, remote computer penetration testing, and vulnerability scans as well as a list of recommendations on how to prevent and recover from ransomware.

These guidelines, however, will not offer advice on whether a state should ultimately pay or refuse to pay ransom to a hacker if one of its systems is already infected.

“Our thought is we don’t want the states to have to be in that situation,” said a Homeland Security official. “We’re focused on preventing it from happening.”

Over the last two years, cyber criminals and nation state hacking groups have used ransomware to extort victims and create chaos. In one incident in 2017, which has since been attributed to Russian hackers, a ransomware virus was used to mask a data deletion technique, rendering victim computers totally unusable.

That attack, dubbed “NotPetya,” went on to damage global corporations, including FedEx and Maersk, which had offices in Ukraine where the malware first spread.

The threat is concerning because of its potential impact on voting results, experts say.

“A pre-election undetected attack could tamper with voter lists, creating huge confusion and delays, disenfranchisement, and at large enough scale could compromise the validity of the election,” said John Sebes, chief technology officer of the ESET Institute, an election technology policy think tank.

The databases are also “particularly susceptible to this kind of attack because local jurisdictions and states actively add, remove, and change the data year-round,” said Maurice Turner, a senior technologist with the Center for Democracy and Technology. “If the malicious actor doesn’t provide the key, the data is lost forever unless the victim has a recent backup.”

Nationwide, the local governments that store and update voter registration data are typically ill-equipped to defend themselves against elite hackers.

State election officials told Reuters they have improved their cyber defenses since 2016, including in some cases preparing backups for voter registration databases in case of an attack. But there is no common standard for how often local governments should create backups, said a senior Homeland Security official.

“We have to remember that this threat to our democracy will not go away, and concern about ransomware attacks on voter registration databases is one clear example,” said Vermont Secretary of State Jim Condos. “We’re sure the threat is far from over.”

 

CBP Long Beach Chinese Weapons Seizure

Posted on by

Three separate shipments, parts were intercepted in recent weeks, according to law enforcement sources familiar with the matter, and were packed in their own cargo containers on three separate ships that were also carrying household items, apparel, toys, industrial machinery and other imports.

With a Domestic Value of over $378,000 the seized items were found in violation of the Chinese Arms Embargo

LOS ANGELES — U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at Los Angeles/Long Beach Seaport in coordination with the Machinery Center of Excellence and Expertise (CEE), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), intercepted and seized 52,601 firearms parts in violation of the Chinese Arms Embargo. The seized items described as sights, stocks, muzzles, brakes, buffer kits, and grips which arrived in three shipments from China, had a combined domestic value of $378,225.00.

CBP officers referred the items to ATF investigators, who confirmed that the firearm parts were in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), 27 CFR 447.52.

“This seizure is an exceptional example of CBP officers and import specialists vigilance, commitment and keen focus in enforcing complex arms embargo regulations,” said Carlos C. Martel, CBP Director of Field Operations in Los Angeles. “The Chinese Arms Embargo is just one of the hundreds of regulations CBP enforces, ensuring the safety and security of our country.”

Federal regulations impose importation restrictions to certain countries to which the United States maintains an arms embargo, and one of such countries is China.

“We work closely with our strategic partners to ensure import compliance while maintaining the highest standards of security at our nation’s largest seaport,” remarked LaFonda Sutton-Burke, CBP Port Director of the LA/Long Beach Seaport. “This interception underscores the successful collaboration between CBP officers, import specialists and ATF investigators.” In fiscal year (FY) 2018, Office of Field Operations (OFO) seized 266,279 firearms, firearm parts, ammunition, fireworks and explosives at 328 ports of entry throughout the United States. These interceptions represent an increase of 18.4 percent from the previous year.

***

Gotta wonder what led to this. Consider if this is related.  Just 2 months ago…

When federal agents raided the Southern California home of US Customs and Border Protection supervisor Wei “George” Xu in February, they seized an arsenal of more than 250 weapons, including nearly three dozen illegal machine guns, according to court records.

Image result for Wei "George" Xu arrested photo

“Weapons of war,” a prosecutor would later call them.
Xu, 56, was arrested and charged with dealing firearms without a license. He has pleaded not guilty.
But guns are not the reason the veteran officer has been held without bond since his arrest four months ago.
Instead, the Chinese-born naturalized US citizen has remained behind bars amid concerns about his secret-level security clearance and what prosecutors described as “highly suspicious” contacts with Chinese consular officials in Los Angeles.
Prosecutors are also examining the apparent gulf between Xu’s estimated $120,000-to-$130,000 salary as a federal law enforcement officer and his “luxurious lifestyle,” in which he drove a Maserati, went on big game hunting trips to Africa and had approximately $1.4 million in the bank, according to court records. The cache of weapons recovered from Xu’s house was estimated to be worth more than $200,000, according to prosecutors. Additionally, prosecutors allege that Xu and his wife failed to report several years of income from a rental property they’ve owned since 2015.
Xu’s defense attorney, Mark Werksman, said in court papers that his client has lived in the United States for three decades, has no previous criminal record, and, because his passport was seized as part of the investigation, has no ability to travel outside the country.
The lawyer was unsuccessful, however, in his attempt to convince a federal judge at a hearing last month that Xu could be trusted to show up for trial if he was released. The hearing marked the third time Xu’s request for bond was denied.
Annamartine Salick, deputy chief of the Terrorism and Export Crime Section of the US Attorney’s office in Los Angeles and the lead prosecutor on the case against Xu, declined comment.
In a court filing, she cited Xu’s “litany of lies and contempt for the rule of law” as among the reasons he should be denied bond.
Jack Weiss, a former federal prosecutor in Los Angeles who now runs an investigative firm, said the allegations against Xu are especially troubling given his role in law enforcement.
“This is someone you would never want in a position of authority in the US government,” Weiss said. “I imagine there is going to be some kind of internal review as to how it is that he was wearing a badge.”
Born in China, Xu came to the United States on a student visa in the late 1980s. He became a naturalized citizen in 1999. In 2004, following stints in the private sector as an engineer and entrepreneur, he was hired by Customs and Border Protection — a job requiring a secret-level security clearance subject to periodic renewals.
Prior to his arrest in February, Xu worked as a watch commander for CBP at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
Jaime Ruiz, a spokesman for US Customs and Border Protection, said Xu is now on “indefinite suspension.”
According to prosecutors, Xu repeatedly made false statements and concealed information when he filled out questionnaires for his security clearance under penalty of perjury.
Among other things, prosecutors said, Xu failed to disclose his ownership of two companies that do business with China and his “extensive business contacts with Chinese nationals.”
Agents say they found evidence of a bank account in China in the trash outside Xu’s home and recovered two copies of Chinese passports, bearing the name Wei Xu but featuring photos of other people, from Xu’s desk.
Salick argued at one of Xu’s detention hearings that she’d been told by CBP officers that if Xu falsely claimed to have lost his own passport, he could pretend to be one of the Chinese citizens bearing his name, provide that man’s biographical information to the Chinese consulate, and would likely be issued travel documents to return to China.
Following Xu’s arrest, investigators learned of his “long-standing contact with members of the Consulate General of the People’s Republic of China in Los Angeles,” according to court records.
Agents seized emails, texts and phone records showing that Xu had been communicating with consular officials since at least 2013, according to court records. He was invited to events hosted by the consulate in 2017 and 2018, the records state, and agents reviewed images on his cell phone “appearing to show” that Xu and his wife attended the events.
Attempts to reach Chinese consular officials in Los Angeles were not immediately successful.
Werksman downplayed his client’s purported wealth in a brief interview with CNN, saying, for example, that the Maserati was leased. He said Xu’s companies exported forklift parts and generated limited income. He said the Chinese bank account authorities discovered was opened 20 years ago and contained the relatively meager sum of $1,700.
He also dismissed any intrigue surrounding Xu’s ties to China.
He said in a court filing that the photocopies of passports seized from his office were placed there by co-workers playing a prank on Xu, whose duties include overseeing entry and exit of Chinese vessels in San Pedro, and who was at one point investigating two men who had the same — very common — first and last name that he did.
He said Xu’s contact with consular officials was related to his work at the port, in which he sometimes contacted the consulate about crewmembers on Chinese ships who were seeking asylum in the United States.
“There’s nothing nefarious about it,” he told CNN.
It was while investigating Xu regarding his security clearance that agents discovered his alleged involvement in the illegal gun trade.
In the summer of 2017, FBI agents say they retrieved a spreadsheet listing online accounts and login information from the trash outside Xu’s home. Two of the accounts pertained to a website that acts as a marketplace for private gun sales.
An undercover agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives began corresponding with Xu and eventually purchased four guns.
In one transaction in July, Xu showed up in a 2016 Maserati with an assault rifle in the trunk, according to prosecutors.
The undercover agent commented on the black sedan before giving Xu $1,600 cash for the rifle.
“I’m like you, playboy,” Xu allegedly responded.
Following another deal, in which Xu allegedly sold the agent a rifle and five high-capacity magazines for $2,100, the CBP officer quipped, “We are like drug dealers,” according to a search warrant affidavit.
Werksman described his client as a “nerdy engineer” who collected firearms as a hobby and had no intention of becoming a gun dealer.
“He comes home from work, goes out to the garage and tinkers with guns,” the lawyer said. “He wasn’t going to hurt anyone.”
You can be sure that the drugs https://1canadianantibiotics.com/buy-doxycyclyne-online/ you are buying were stored in a right way because physical pharmacies are regulated by the governmental authorities, which means they offer only authentic over-the-counter and prescription medications;
You do not violate the laws of your nation, because the import of drugs from international drugstores is often prohibited by the legislation of many countries including the US.