Washingtontimes.com
In the year after September 11, the hand-wringing mostly centered on the intelligence community's failure to "connect the dots." But what if the "dots" hadn't been in this country in the first place? If the State Department had followed the law, at least 15 of the 19 "dots" should have been denied visas — and they likely wouldn't have been in the United States on September 11, 2001.
According to expert analyses of the visa application forms of 15 of the 19 September 11 terrorists (the other four applications could not be obtained), all the applicants among the 15 reviewed should have been denied visas under then-existing law. Six separate experts who analyzed the simple, two-page forms — which can be viewed exclusively at NationalReview.com — came to the same conclusion: All of the visa applications they reviewed should have been denied on their face.
Even to the untrained eye, it is not hard to see why many of the visas should have been denied. Consider, for example, the U.S. destinations most of them listed. Only one of the 15 provided an actual address — and that was only because his first application was refused — and the rest listed such not-so-specific locations as "California," "New York," "Hotel D.C.," and "Hotel." One terrorist, Saeed al Ghamdi, obtained a second visa in less than a year (both in Saudi Arabia), yet on the second application, he checked "No" to the question "Have you ever applied for a U.S. nonimmigrant visa?" Clearly, he had — but the consular officer apparently didn't notice.
Posted by Suzanne at October 9, 2002