Archive | General News RSS for this section

U.S. Department of State – Priority Dates for Family Based Preferences, October 2006

U.S. Department of State – Priority Dates for Family Based Preferences, October 2006
NOTE: This information has been obtained
from the Department of State visa bulletin.

Family

All
Chargeability Areas

Except Those Listed

CHINA-mainland
born

INDIA

MEXICO

PHILIP-PINES

1st

01MAY00

01MAY00

01MAY00

01JAN93

01NOV91

2A

22APR01

22APR01

22APR01

15OCT99

22APR01

2B

01JAN97

01JAN97

01JAN97

15FEB92

22JUL96

3rd

22OCT98

22OCT98

22OCT98

01JAN94

01AUG90

4th

15SEP95

01FEB95

01AUG95

15SEP93

01APR84

 

1st:

Unmarried Sons and Daughters of
Citizens: 23,400 plus any numbers not required for fourth preference.

2A:

Spouses and Children: 77% of the
overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the
per-country limit;

2B:

Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21
years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.

3rd:

Married Sons and Daughters of
Citizens: 23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second
preferences.

4th:

Brothers and Sisters of Adult
Citizens: 65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.

Border security plan delayed

Via CNN.com
09/27/2006

WASHINGTON (AP) — A plan to tighten U.S. borders by
requiring passports or tamper-resistant identification cards from
everyone entering the country by land from Mexico and Canada has been
delayed.

House and Senate lawmakers agreed to push back the
program by 17 months, saying they want to make sure new ID cards being
developed by the Bush administration will better secure borders against
terrorists without slowing legitimate travelers from Canada and Mexico.
The new ID’s will be required for Americans and all others entering the
U.S.

The delay would only apply to travelers entering the U.S.
over land borders from Canada and Mexico. It would not affect travel
rules for people coming into the country by airplane or cruise ship,
who will have to show their passports to Customs officials as of
January 8, 2007, to gain entry.

The border crackdown was wrapped
up in an overall $34.8 billion spending plan for the Homeland Security
Department. The House and Senate each aim to approve it later this
week, before lawmakers recess for the elections.

The spending
bill reflects “a dramatic step forward toward making sure that our
borders are secure,” Sen. Judd Gregg, R-New Hampshire, who helped
negotiate the measure, said Tuesday.

Gregg added: “We still have a long way to go. Nobody is going to argue about that.”

The massive spending bill also includes plans to:

  • Spend
    $1.2 billion on border fencing, vehicle barriers and technology to
    prevent illegal immigrants and criminals from sneaking into the country.
  • Overhaul
    the Federal Emergency Management Agency to give its director a direct
    line to the president during catastrophes and remerge disaster
    preparedness planning with response missions.
  • Give the Homeland Security Department authority to shut down chemical plants that fail to meet security standards.
  • Buy nuclear detectors to scan shipping cargo and hire more Coast Guard inspectors and Customs agents at seaports.
  • Allow
    Americans to legally import a 90-day supply of prescription medications
    from Canada by carrying them back across the border, while retaining
    bans on importing drugs by mail or the Internet.
  • Continue reading

    The US Department of State Announces 2008 Diversity Visa Lottery Program Registration

    09/22/2006

    The US Department of State (DOS) announced that applications for the 2008 Diversity Visa (DV) Lottery will be accepted between Wednesday, October 4, 2006, 12 pm EST and Sunday, December 3, 2006, 12 pm EST. Applicants may access the electronic Diversity Visa entry form online. Paper entries will not be accepted. Applicants are encouraged not to wait until the last week of the registration period to enter since heavy demand may result in website delays.

    Visit the DOS website for more information

    Probe: Canada gave U.S. misleading data

    Via SeattlePI.com

    TORONTO — An inquiry into the U.S. transfer of a Canadian citizen
    to prison in Syria found Canadian authorities gave misleading
    information to the Americans that likely led to the deportation, a
    report released Monday said.

    After his release in 2003,
    Syrian-born Maher Arar made detailed allegations about extensive
    interrogation, beatings and whippings with electrical cable in Syrian
    prison cells.

    Arar was traveling on a Canadian passport when
    he was detained at a New York airport in September 2002 during a
    stopover on his way home to Canada from vacation in Tunisia. He claims
    he was a victim of extraordinary rendition – or the transfer of foreign
    terror suspects to third countries without court approval.

    Arar
    said U.S. authorities sent him to Syria for interrogation on suspicion
    of being a member of al-Qaida, an allegation he denied.

    Canada’s
    federal government established an inquiry in 2004 to determine the role
    Canadian officials played in the case of Arar, who has been cleared of
    any terrorist connections.

    Justice Dennis O’Connor released
    the report on Arar that concluded the Royal Canadian Mounted Police
    passed misleading, inaccurate and unfair information to U.S.
    authorities that “very likely” led to their decision to send Arar to
    Syria, but found no evidence Canadian officials participated in or
    agreed to the decision.

    Continue reading

    Lack of migrant workers leaves county farms choking in weeds

    Via LongmontFYI.com
    09/17/2006

    Farmers cope with labor shortage

    LONGMONT — A dry summer and the shortage of migrant laborers have depleted Boulder and Weld county crop production this year.

    Sugar beet and organic vegetable farmers stand to lose the most in ag
    yield this fall because of a labor shortage that has left their fields
    choking on weeds.

    Organic farmers rely most on migrant laborers because organic-label
    standards limit them from using many chemical herbicides, Longmont soil
    conservationist Don Graffis said. Those farmers typically employ large
    numbers of Hispanic workers to weed their fields and, in many cases, to
    harvest them.

    Hand-picked vegetables often receive less bruising than mechanically harvested vegetables and sell for more money, he said.

    Along with drought, farmers this year have also begun to cope with new
    state laws that many say have already scared immigrant workers out of
    Colorado.

    Continue reading

    Dotting the I’s, Crossing the T’s

    Via Baywindows.com

    Trans people face heightened scrutiny in a post-9/11 world

    You’re driving in your car and get stopped by the police for speeding.
    The officer asks for your license and registration and takes them back
    to the police car. He swipes a strip on the back of the license into a
    computer, and instantly has access to an assortment of personal
    documents about you, from your birth certificate to letters from your
    doctor detailing your most private and intimate medical history. While
    it sounds like a plotline pulled from the Sci-Fi Channel’s new fall
    lineup, it could be a very real scenario for members of the transgender
    community if the Real ID Act goes into effect as scheduled in May 2008.

    Continue reading

    Streamlined Program Makes Getting a U.S. Visa More Efficient

    Via DOS

    Students, as always, are welcomed to the United States, official says

    Washington — U.S. efforts to improve its visa process are paying
    off:  Nearly 97 percent of visa applications are processed within just
    two or three days of the interview, and worldwide almost 80 percent of
    visa applications are approved.  In 2006, the United States expects to
    process some 7.5 million visa applications.

    Tony Edson, deputy
    assistant secretary of state for visa services, brought this good news
    to an international audience during a September 6 webchat.

    Students in particular are welcome, as they always have been, Edson said.

    “The
    United States and our consular officers everywhere around the world
    value highly the exchange of international visitors and ideas,” he
    said.  “We do our best to ensure America remains a welcoming
    destination for international travelers while administering U.S. law
    and safeguarding our borders.”

    GETTING A STUDENT VISA

    “There
    is a widespread perception in some countries that it has become more
    difficult to qualify for a student visa to the United States,” Edson
    said.  “In fact, although we have made significant changes to the
    application process by incorporating additional security checks,
    fingerprinting and greatly expanded interview requirements, the basic
    requirements for a student visa have not changed.”

    Students
    now are required to go to the U.S. embassy or consulate to be
    fingerprinted and interviewed, but if they are bona fide students and
    are able to fund the education they plan in the United States, they are
    likely to qualify for visas, Edson said.

    Edson did emphasize,
    however, that the major mandate under U.S. law is that student visa
    applicants must prove that they intend to return to their home country
    after a temporary stay in the United States.

    “We recognize,”
    Edson said, “that the very best advertisement for America is America
    and look forward to each and every international student who arrives at
    our shores. We have added some additional security measures to the visa
    process since 9/11, but even as we strive to make our country safer, we
    have never stopped trying to make those security measures as efficient
    and effective as possible.”

    He urged students to apply for
    their visas as early as possible and noted that students are given
    priority in scheduling visa interviews.

    U.S. VISA LAWS TREAT ALL EQUALLY

    “The
    United States government,” Edson emphasized, “does not discriminate
    based on religion or any other factor in processing visas.

    “U.S.
    visas are processed everywhere around the world using the same
    standards and requirements, most of them stipulated in U.S. law,” he
    said.

    He acknowledged that in some countries a higher
    percentage of applicants might fail to qualify than in other
    countries.  “This is not because of their nationality, but because of
    their inability, as individual applicants, to meet the requirements of
    U.S. law, Edson said.

    One important law governing the visa
    process, he said, is Section 214(b) of the U.S. Immigration and
    Nationality Act.  The presumption under that law, Edson explained, is
    that every visitor visa applicant is intending to immigrate to the
    United States.

    Therefore, applicants for visitor visas, he
    said, must overcome this presumption by demonstrating that that they
    have ties abroad that would compel them to leave the United States at
    the end of their temporary stay.   Among the ties that bind a person to
    his or her country of residence are possessions, employment and social
    and family relationships.  U.S. consular officers make the
    determination, but the burden of proof is on the applicant, he said.

    “In
    cases of students or younger applicants who may not have had an
    opportunity to form many ties, consular officers may look at the
    applicant’s specific intentions, family situations, and long-range
    plans and prospects within his or her country of residence,” Edson
    said. “Each case is examined individually and is accorded every
    consideration under the law.”

    “Denial under Section 214(b) of
    the law is not permanent,” Edson said, “and a consular officer will
    reconsider a case if an applicant can show further convincing evidence
    of ties outside the United States. Unfortunately, some applicants will
    not qualify for a nonimmigrant visa, regardless of how many times they
    reapply, until their personal, professional, and financial
    circumstances change considerably. “

    Under the Visa Waiver
    Program, Edson noted, travelers from countries that have met criteria
    specified in U.S. law can travel for tourism and business to the United
    States without applying for a visa. Visa Waiver Program travelers can
    stay in the United States for no longer than 90 days.

    THE VISA WAIVER PROGRAM

    Visa Waiver Program (VWP) travelers must have secure passports, and all passports must be machine-readable.

    Many
    passports are now equipped with security features, such as digital
    photographs and contactless chips that can be read without being
    touched to a sensor.

    VWP travelers who obtained
    machine-readable passports (MRPs) before October 26, 2005, are not
    required to have the digital photograph or contactless chip, Edson
    said.  The traveler who obtained, renewed or extended an MRP before
    October 26, 2005, will not be required to get another passport for
    travel until his or her MRP expires.

    Passports issued, renewed or extended on or after October 26, 2006, must be machine-readable and include the integrated chip.

    For more information, see the online journal “See You in the USA,” the IIP web site Immigration Reform and the State Department’s Bureau of Consular Affairs Web site.

    A transcript of Edson’s remarks is available at IIP’s Webchat Station.

    (The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International
    Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site:
    http://usinfo.state.gov)

    New Process for Issuing Employment Authorization Documents to Asylees

    USCIS Public Notice
    09/14/2006

    Beginning October 1, 2006, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Asylum Division will implement a new process nationwide for issuing secure Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) to applicants who are granted asylum by a USCIS Asylum Office. Under existing regulations, asylees are eligible to work in the United States incident to their asylum status. Previously, USCIS Asylum Offices issued provisional Form I-688B cards evidencing employment authorization to asylees interviewed at a local Asylum Office on the same date they received their asylum approval letters. Those who were interviewed at an Asylum Office circuit ride location (usually a USCIS District Office) were instructed to return to the District Office to receive their I-688B cards. The I-688B card was issued with a 1-year validity period. Under the new process, asylees will receive in the mail the standard, more secure Form I-766 EAD card in the mail within seven to ten days after the date they are issued their asylum approval letters. The Form I-766 EAD will be issued for a 2-year validity period. This will provide most asylees sufficient time to apply for and receive adjustment of status before the validity period of the EAD expires. In March 2006, the Asylum Division successfully tested this new EAD issuance process in the Arlington Asylum Office during a pilot program and will implement the program in all Asylum Offices throughout the nation by October 1, 2006.

    Q: Why is USCIS changing the process for issuing asylees EADs?

    A: Changing the process accomplishes several USCIS objectives, including enhancing security, customer service, and efficiency in case processing. This change allows USCIS Asylum Offices to issue more secure documents, as the I-766 is more resistant to tampering than an I-688B. Issuance of the I-766 also offers greater convenience for asylees by providing a more widely circulated and recognizable employment authorization document. Issuance of I-766 EADs also contributes to the agency’s goal of relying increasingly on secure means (in this instance, biometric images from the I-766) to verify the status of non-citizens for various purposes, including those asylees hired by employers who are participating in the Basic Pilot employment verification program or a parallel program that verifies status of non-citizen benefit applicants for certain Federal, state and local agencies. While both cards are free of charge, the I-766 for asylees will be issued with a 2-year validity period. The I-688B has been issued for only a 1-year validity period because it is not as secure a document at the I-766. With this extended validity period and the recent elimination of the 10,000 cap on asylee adjustments, it is expected that most new asylees will be able to apply for and receive adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident before their initial EADs expire, which would save asylees the cost of the service fee associated with renewal of EAD cards. Finally, efficiencies in case processing are gained by generating the I-766 through a computer-automated process rather than through the more labor intensive process of generating I-688Bs. In addition, requiring asylees to have secure EADs contributes to theagency’s increasing ability to electronically verify the status of noncitizens for various purposes, such as those who are hired by employers who are participating in the Basic Pilot employment verification program or the similar program that verifies status of noncitizen benefit applicants for certain Federal, state and local agencies.
    This change does not modify in any way existing USCIS Asylum Office procedures to issue to asylees approval letters and stamped I-94 Arrival-Departure Records evidencing asylum status, which may be used to obtain a social security card.

    Q: How is the new process for obtaining EADs different from the previous process for obtaining EADs?

    A: Previously, most applicants who were interviewed at a local Asylum Office and granted asylum received the Form I-688B EAD free of charge on the same day they returned to the Asylum Office to pick up their decision. On that day, the applicant’s biometrics (i.e., fingerprint, photograph and signature) were taken at the Asylum Office and then used to manually create a laminated I-688B card on site at the Asylum Office. Those applicants who were interviewed at a circuit ride location and received notice by mail that they had been granted asylum were instructed to go to the local USCIS District Office where the I-688B was produced and provided to the asylee on the same day. The I-688B cards were valid for a period of one year.
    Unlike the I-688B, the I-766 is mailed directly to the asylee’s residence within seven to ten days after the date they are issued their approval letters. The I-766, which is also free, is automatically generated using the applicant’s fingerprint, photograph, and signature, which are captured as part of the required fingerprinting process at the USCIS Application Support Center (ASC) and stored in a database. The I-766 for these asylees is valid for a period of two years.

    Q: To whom does this new EAD process apply?

    A: The new EAD process will apply to asylees (both principals and dependents included in the asylum application) who were granted asylum through the affirmative asylum process, which takes place in front of a USCIS Asylum Officer. These asylees also must have biometrics on file with USCIS in order to have an EAD card produced through the new process.
    Note: Applicants granted asylum by an Asylum Office are eligible for the 2-year I-766 regardless of whether they have been previously issued an EAD based on a recommended approval or a pending asylum application.

    Q: To whom does this new EAD process not apply?

    A: Because this new process is being implemented at USCIS Asylum Offices and will be used for only those asylees who were granted asylum by USCIS, the new EAD process does not apply to:
    1. Asylee following-to-join cases (beneficiaries of an approved form I-730).
    2. Applicants granted asylum by an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals within the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR)
    3. Applicants granted asylum by a federal court judge.
    Asylees following-to join should submit a form I-765 to the appropriate Service Center as indicated in the form instructions, and the secure I-766 EAD card will then be sent to the asylee in the mail. Individuals granted asylum by EOIR or a federal judge should continue to make their appointments with the local USCIS District or Sub Office to begin immediate processing for an EAD. See post-order instructions for obtaining documentation at http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/PostOrderInstr.pdf. The USCIS District or Sub Office will confirm the asylee’s final EOIR order, biographic information, and address and initiate production of the secure EAD (I-766), with a 2-year validity period, through an automated process. In some cases, it may be necessary for the District or Sub Office to instruct the EOIR-granted asylee to provide biometrics for card production. If so, USCIS will provide an ASC appointment promptly. The asylee will then receive the EAD in the mail within 7 to 10 days. The I-688B EAD will no longer be issued at the District or Sub Offices to EOIR-granted asylees because it is being discontinued. District and Sub Offices will continue to issue asylees in the three categories listed above stamped I-94 Arrival-Departure Records evidencing asylum status.

    Q: Can asylees granted by an Asylum Office use this new process for renewals, replacements, or extensions of EADs?

    A: No. Under the new process, as under the old process, Asylum Offices will not issue renewals, replacements, or extensions of EADs. Instead, all asylees must apply for a renewal, replacement, or extension by submitting a Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization Document, to the Nebraska Service Center and paying the applicable fee.

    Q: How will asylees be told about
    the new EAD process?

    A: The Asylum Office will verbally inform asylees who receive their grant letters in person of the new procedures and provide written information that summarizes the process of obtaining an EAD. Applicants who will receive their approval letters in the mail, generally those who are in valid status and those interviewed at a circuit ride location, will be informed of the new procedures in a packet of information included with the asylum grant letter, sent via the mail.

    Q: How will the asylee be able to receive the I-766 if he or she has a change of address after the asylum interview?

    A: Asylees who receive their grant letters in person at the Asylum Office will be asked that same day to verify that the address the office has on file is correct and the office will update the address if it is not correct. Within seven to ten days after the decision issuance, the asylee will receive the I-766 at any updated address provided. For asylees who are to receive their decision in the mail, prior to mailing the decision, Asylum Office staff will check the databases for the most recent address on file to ensure that the decision and the I-766 is mailed to the correct address. It is imperative that asylum applicants comply with the law and report changes of address to the Department of Homeland Security and the local Asylum Office within 10 days of the change.

    Q: What if an asylee does not receive his or her card in the mail?

    A: If an asylee granted by a USCIS Asylum Office does not receive the I-766 within fourteen (14) days of the issuance of asylum approval, the asylee should contact the local Asylum Office, per the instructions contained in the approval letter packet.

    U.S. immigration agency speeding up procedures

    Via Reuters
    09/15/2006

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
    said on Friday it will meet its goal of reducing the average wait time
    for immigration services to six months by the end of September.

    The
    agency formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service
    also said the total number of pending cases that exceeded the six-month
    wait period fell from 3.8 million in January 2004 to 1.1 million in
    July this year.

    “It really is a Herculean achievement that we’ve
    been able to achieve this,” Emilio Gonzalez, the agency’s director told
    reporters.

    Nearly 1 million applications will still be pending at
    the start of October, said Michael Ayetes, director of USCIS field
    operations.

    But the agency considers these outside its control because they
    are awaiting feedback from other agencies such as the FBI, or
    information or documents from applicants, Ayetes said.

    In July
    2001, President George W. Bush asked the agency to establish a
    six-month standard from start to finish for processing immigration
    applications.

    Three main types of services still face backlogs,
    Ayetes said. They include relative petitions, in which a U.S. citizen
    asks for the naturalization of a relative, requests for permanent
    residence and asylum applications.

    The offices with the biggest numbers of backlogs are New York, Miami and Atlanta, he added.

    Crystal
    Williams of the American Immigration Lawyers Association said USCIS
    holds some responsibility for the nearly 1 million applications it says
    are outside the agency’s control.

    “They have become faster and
    they’ve made progress … but in many cases they are generating these
    numbers by sending unneeded requests for extra documentation (to
    applicants),” she said.

    Williams added the agency should also establish procedures to get information from other agencies faster.

    Immigration raids make a ghost town in Georgia

    Via CNN.com

    STILLMORE, Georgia (AP) — Trailer parks lie abandoned. The
    poultry plant is scrambling to replace more than half its workforce.
    Business has dried up at stores where Mexican laborers once lined up to
    buy food, beer and cigarettes just weeks ago.

    This Georgia
    community of about 1,000 people has become little more than a ghost
    town since September 1, when federal agents began rounding up illegal
    immigrants.

    The sweep has had the unintended effect of underscoring just how vital the illegal immigrants were to the local economy.

    More
    than 120 illegal immigrants have been loaded onto buses bound for
    immigration courts in Atlanta, 189 miles away. Hundreds more fled
    Emanuel County. Residents say many scattered into the woods, camping
    out for days. They worry some are still hiding without food.

    At
    least one child, born a U.S. citizen, was left behind by his Mexican
    parents: 2-year-old Victor Perez-Lopez. The toddler’s mother, Rosa
    Lopez, left her son with Julie Rodas when the raids began and fled the
    state. The boy’s father was deported to Mexico.

    “When his momma
    brought this baby here and left him, tears rolled down her face and
    mine too,” Rodas said. “She said, `Julie, will you please take care of
    my son because I have no money, no way of paying rent?”‘

    For five
    years, Rodas has made a living watching the children of workers at the
    Crider Inc. poultry plant, where the vast majority of employees were
    Mexican immigrants. She learned Spanish, and considered many immigrants
    among her closest friends. She threw parties for their children’s
    birthdays and baptisms.

    The only child in Rodas’ care now, besides her own son, is Victor. Her customers have disappeared.

    Federal
    agents also swarmed into a trailer park operated by David Robinson.
    Illegal immigrants were handcuffed and taken away. Almost none have
    returned. Robinson bought an American flag and posted it by the pond
    out front — upside down, in protest.

    “These people might not
    have American rights, but they’ve damn sure got human rights,” Robinson
    said. “There ain’t no reason to treat them like animals.”

    The raids came during a fall election season in which immigration is a top issue.

    Illegal immigrant population doubles

    Last
    month, the federal government reported that Georgia had the
    fastest-growing illegal immigrant population in the country. The number
    more than doubled from an estimated 220,000 in 2000 to 470,000 last
    year. This year, state lawmakers passed some of the nation’s toughest
    measures targeting illegal immigrants, and Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue
    last week vowed a statewide crackdown on document fraud.

    Other
    than the Crider plant, there isn’t much in Stillmore. Four small
    stores, a coin laundry and a Baptist church share downtown with City
    Hall, the fire department and a post office. “We’re poor but proud,”
    Mayor Marilyn Slater said, as if that is the town motto.

    The 2000
    Census put Stillmore’s population at 730, but Slater said uncounted
    immigrants probably made it more than 1,000. Not anymore, with so many
    homes abandoned and the streets practically empty.

    “This reminds me of what I read about Nazi Germany, the Gestapo coming in and yanking people up,” Slater said.

    Immigration
    and Customs Enforcement spokesman Marc Raimondi would not discuss
    details of the raids. “We can’t lose sight of the fact that these
    people were here illegally,” Raimondi said.

    Businesses may have to close

    At
    Sucursal Salina No. 2, a store stocked with Mexican fruit sodas and
    snacks, cashier Alberto Gonzalez said Wednesday that the owner may
    shutter the place. By midday, Gonzalez has had only six customers.
    Normally, he would see 100.

    The B&S convenience store, owned
    by Keith and Regan Slater, the mayor’s son and grandson, has lost about
    80 percent of its business.

    “These people come over here to make
    a better way of life, not to blow us up,” complained Keith Slater, who
    keeps a portrait of Ronald Reagan on the wall. “I’m a die-hard
    Republican, but I think we missed the boat with this one.”

    Since
    the mid-1990s, Stillmore has grown dependent on the paychecks of
    Mexican workers who originally came for seasonal farm labor, picking
    the area’s famous Vidalia onions. Many then took year-round jobs at the
    Crider plant, with a workforce of about 900.

    Crider President
    David Purtle said the agents began inspecting the company’s employment
    records in May. They found 700 suspected illegal immigrants, and
    supervisors handed out letters over the summer ordering them to prove
    they came to the U.S. legally or be fired. Only about 100 kept their
    jobs.

    The arrests started at the plant September 1. During the
    Labor Day weekend, agents with guns and bulletproof vests converged on
    workers’ homes after getting the addresses from Crider’s files.

    Continue reading

    Remarks by Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff on September 11: Five Years Later

    Via Department of Homeland Security

    Washington, D.C.


    Georgetown University
    September 8, 2006  

    Secretary Chertoff:
    Well, thank you very much for that warm welcome and for the opportunity
    to address you in a very handsome hall here in what I gather is the
    oldest building in the campus and one in which George Washington used
    as the basis of his farewell to the diplomatic corps.

    Provost
    O’Donnell, I appreciate your introduction. I want to thank Gary
    Schiffman, who is a former colleague at the Department of Homeland
    Security, for welcoming me to the university to speak.

    And
    I’d also like to thank Daniel Byman, the Director of the Center for
    Peace and Security Studies, who I gather was not able to be with us
    here today. And of course, it’s a pleasure to have colleagues from the
    Department, students, and friends, as well.

    Today, we are
    gathered just a few days before the 5th anniversary of the September
    11th attacks against the United States. And as we begin to think back
    on the events of that tragic day, we have an opportunity to look, both
    in terms of what we’ve learned and to look ahead in terms of what we
    know we need to do. It’s appropriate to reflect on some of the steps
    we’ve already taken, and to measure the progress we have already made
    to protect our country and our citizens against further attacks. And of
    course, it’s certainly worth remarking on the fact that there has not
    been a successful attack against Americans on American soil since
    September 11th.

    But we also have to recognize remaining
    challenges and be clear about setting the priorities we need to have in
    place to make sure that there is not a successful attack in the years
    to come.

    For everybody in this room and for everybody in
    this country, September 11th remains a defining moment in our personal
    lives and in the history of our country. Even today, looking back, it’s
    difficult to comprehend the full nature of the devastation and loss of
    life that flowed from this premeditated and infamous act of war against
    innocent people from all over the world, doing nothing more than
    working here or visiting here in the United States; a senseless
    campaign of murder that resulted in the death of nearly 3,000 men,
    women and children of all backgrounds and all faiths.

    All
    of us have our personal memories of that day where we each — where
    each of us were, what we experienced, how we first learned about it. I
    can tell you, speaking for myself, I was the head of the criminal
    division, and from the moment that I first learned that there had been
    airplanes directed into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, I
    dedicated myself, with my colleagues in the government, to tracking
    down those who had done us harm and who still intended to do us harm.

    And
    even today, when I go into New York, and I look at the scar in the
    earth that is what remains of the physical structure of the World Trade
    Center, it’s hard to escape that feeling of the breathtaking
    devastation and the infamous nature of that crime against humanity,
    which was the attack on the World Trade Center.

    So for
    those who need to be reinvigorated in the struggle against terror, I
    suggest that as we approach this 5th anniversary, you visit the site of
    the World Trade Center or the Pentagon, where an airplane killed many,
    many of our soldiers and our defense workers, or to go out to the field
    in Shanksville, where the heroic passengers of United Flight 93 averted
    yet another attack against our nation’s capital.

    The fact
    of the matter is, no words can fully describe the measure of the
    tragedy of 9/11. But amid the horror of that day, we should also
    remember that we witnessed tremendous courage, valor, and sacrifice:
     first responders who gave their lives entering burning buildings,
    citizens who fought back over the skies in Pennsylvania, other citizens
    on other aircraft who picked up their cell phones and called loved ones
    in the last moments before those planes were turned into weapons of
    mass destruction. Out of the crucible of 9/11, we witnessed not only
    horrible evil, but also wonderful courage and virtue. And I think that
    we ought to consider the shining example that comes out of it that day,
    as well as the clear warning of what lies ahead if we do not continue
    to build our safety and security here in the United States and all over
    the world.

    We’ve had five years to absorb the lessons of
    9/11, and we have acted deliberately and decisively to reduce the risk
    that we will ever face another day like that infamous September
    morning. We’ve learned that we cannot be complacent in the face of
    terrorism. The fact is that terrorists continue to plot, even as we
    strike against them. That was exposed yet again this past August, when
    we uncovered and disrupted a potential horrible attack against
    airliners flying from the United Kingdom to the  United States.

    And
    we’ve been less successful in other parts of the world. There have been
    attacks against American citizens overseas, our allies and innocent
    civilians in London, in Bali, and in Madrid, and all over. Americans
    have come to understand that protecting our nation involves trade-offs.
    We cannot pursue the illusion of perfect security obtained at any
    price, but we must pursue a security that is strong, and it has to be
    one that is also consistent with our freedoms, our values, and our way
    of life.

    As we begin this first decade of the 21st
    century, therefore, having emerged from the Cold War and the struggles
    of World War II, we face a new challenge that has every bit as much
    danger as the challenges we have faced in this country in prior
    decades. And we have to reorient our approach to that threat. We have
    to build a security system with urgency, with flexibility, and with
    resolve.

    Now, a critical part of the President’s strategy
    in dealing with this new threat of terror involves in taking the war to
    the enemy overseas — in Afghanistan, in Iraq, all over the world —
    working with our international partners to disrupt terrorist plots and
    to dismantle terrorist threats before they reach our own shores.

    Here
    at home, we have to continue to work to build a unified set of
    effective capabilities to manage the risk to the people of this
    country. The Department of Homeland Security, which I am privileged to
    lead, was created specifically to integrate our national capabilities
    against all kinds of threats, whether they be acts of terror or natural
    hazards, or even medical hazards like pandemic flu. And the key to this
    integrated approach, this partnership, working with state and local
    governments, working with the private sector, working with our allies
    overseas, and most important, working with the individuals and families
    and communities all over the United States.

    So looking
    back and looking forward, how do we build on our progress to date?
     What are the remaining challenges we have to face?  And how are we
    going to allocate priorities among them?  And what is the path we have
    to follow to achieve those steps that must be in place to guarantee
    ourselves and our families safety in the years to come?

    Well,
    let me say, there’s one critical thing we have to recognize at the
    threshold. We have to be focused on the most significant risks, and we
    have to apply our resources in the most practical way possible to
    prevent, protect against, and respond to manmade and natural hazards.
    That means we have to make a tough-minded assessment, and we have to
    recognize that it is simply not possible to eliminate every threat to
    every individual in every place at every moment. That is simply not the
    way life works.

    And if we could achieve absolute perfect
    security against all threats, we would only be able to do so at an
    astronomical cost to our liberty and our prosperity. As the President
    said a couple of days ago, you need look no further than the words of
    bin Laden, himself, to see that he sees victory for his cause in
    bankrupting and destroying the countries of the West. And we cannot
    hand him the victory by being so hysterical and overreacting to such a
    great extent that we destroy our way of life in order to protect it.

    That
    means we do have to be disciplined in assessing the threats, looking at
    our vulnerabilities, and weighing consequences, and then we have to
    balance and prioritize our resources against those risks so that we can
    ensure the right amount of protection for Americans in our nation
    without under-protecting, but also without overprotecting.

    So
    let me ask the question:  What are those things we ought to be most
    concerned about?  Well, it seems to me that our priority has to be
    focusing on those possible terrorist events that pose the greatest
    potential consequences to human life and to the continuity of our
    society. At the top of that list is the threat of weapons of mass
    destruction. Weapons of mass destruction are weapons that, if used,
    would have a shattering, earth-shaking consequence for this country.
    And preventing the introduction and use of those weapons has to be the
    number one thing we attend to in the years to come.

    We
    also must continue to guard against infiltration of this country by
    international terrorists, international terrorists who have the
    capability and the intent to cause real damage to the functioning of
    this country by engaging in multiple high consequence attacks on people
    and our economy. And the illustration of this kind of a plot is the
    plot of London — that plot in London that was uncovered this past
    month; a plot that, had it been successful, would not only have caused
    the lives of — cost the lives of thousands of people, but would have
    had a — would have raised a very significant blow against the
    functioning of our entire system of international trade and travel.

    But
    even as we look at these high consequence threats, we have to be
    mindful of something else:  the potential for home-grown acts of
    terrorism. We have to recognize that there are individuals who
    sympathize with terrorist organizations or embrace their ideology, and
    are prepared to use violence as a means to promote a radical, violent
    agenda.

    And to engage with this emerging threat, we have
    to work not only across federal, state and local jurisdictions to
    prevent domestic radicalization and terrorism, but we have to build a
    new level of confidence and trust with our American Muslim community,
    who have to remain critical partners with us in protecting our country.

    So
    let’s look back and measure where we’ve come, and then let me be very
    clear about where we need to go and what our plan is to get there.
    Well, over the last five years, we’ve taken some very significant steps
    to address the threat of terrorism by closing vulnerabilities that
    existed five years ago on September 11th, and by creating what we call
    layers of security across land, sea and air.

    And I think
    I’m going to take the opportunity today to highlight some of the new
    capabilities we have in place and point out what we’re building for the
    next couple of years. These areas include screening people at the
    border to keep bad people out of the country; screening cargo to
    prevent bad things from coming into the country; protecting our
    critical infrastructure so that even if someone mounts an attack, we
    can reduce our vulnerability; sharing information so we can stop
    attacks before they begin; and, finally, boosting our emergency
    preparedness and response so that even if there were a successful
    attack, we could minimize the damage by acting promptly and effectively
    in response.

    First, screening people at the border. Our
    number one defense against terror involves the perimeter, keeping
    dangerous enemies from entering the United States of America.

    Five
    years ago, before September 11th, we had very limited tools to
    accomplish that mission. We had fragmented databases, biographical
    information to determine whether a person posed a security threat or
    should be allowed to enter the United States. The process, even if it
    worked at all, was cumbersome, inefficient, and fraught with
    vulnerabilities. And the proof of the pudding is in what happened on
    September 11th. We learned looking back that terrorists had accessed
    this country on repeated occasions, even though we knew who some of
    them were, and we weren’t able to screen them from coming into the
    United States to execute their deadly plot.

    Today, five
    years later, we have transformed our screening capabilities at the
    international ports of entry. And we’ve done that in order to prevent
    terrorists and criminals from entering the United States to do us harm.
    We have pulled together and unified our counter-terror databases, and
    we’ve dramatically strengthened the process we use to issue visas.

    Equally
    important, we have implemented biometric capabilities,
    fingerprint-reading capabilities at all of our international ports of
    entry. With these new fingerprint reading capabilities, which are part
    of the program we call U.S. Visit, deployed all over the ports of entry
    at land and in the air and at sea, we can now, within seconds,
    positively confirm a person’s identity against their passport and
    against our databases by checking two-digit finger scans against watch
    lists and immigration records.

    The result of this
    dramatic step forward in screening at the border is illustrated to me
    day in and day out when I come in to get my briefing in the morning as
    Secretary. Because repeatedly I hear about dangerous people who have
    been stopped at the border and denied entry based upon the tools we
    have given our border security officials five years after 9/11.

    Of
    course, we have to worry not only about those who come in through the
    ports of entry, like the 9/11 hijackers, but we have to worry about
    those who might come in to do us harm between the ports of entry. And
    here again, we have made protecting our borders one of the top
    priorities of the Department of Homeland Security and, indeed, of the
    entire administration.

    And we’ve made progress securing
    the miles of border, the thousands of miles of border that lie between
    our designated international ports of entry. We’ve done it by giving
    the men and women who do the job of patrolling the border the tools,
    the technology, and the resources they need to do their very important
    job of protecting the perimeter of this country.

    Again,
    looking back five years ago, before 9/11, we had about 9,000 Border
    Patrol agents along our southern and northern border. But under the
    President’s leadership, today we have more than 12,000 Border Patrol
    agents. And by the end of 2008, we will have over 18,000 agents. We
    will have more than doubled the number of Border Patrol between our
    ports of entry. And while we are waiting to recruit and train and
    deploy these additional Border Patrolmen and women, the President has
    ordered the National Guard to the border to support the existing Border
    Patrol agents. And that has caused a huge amplification of our
    capabilities in protecting this country against those who want to cross
    illegally to come in to do us harm.

    Since 9/11, the
    Border Patrol has apprehended and turned away some 6 million illegal
    migrants trying to cross our borders. Now, I’m not saying, of course,
    the vast majority of those are terrorists. Quite the contrary, the vast
    majority of those are coming for economic reasons. But the fact of the
    matter is, if we can control our border and do it in an intelligent and
    comprehensive fashion, we can focus ourselves in continuing to raise
    the barrier against those who would come to this country to do us harm.

    Let
    me tell you some other things we have done to control the space between
    our ports of entry. Before September 11th, we did not have the adequate
    bed space that we needed to detain people who came in illegally that we
    captured. And so a significant number of these people, even if they
    were caught entering illegally were released into the community — and
    to no one’s great surprise, never showed up again for their court
    appearances.

    But today, by taking a disciplined and
    strategic approach to dealing with the crisis of illegal migration, we
    have completely transformed that policy. We have ended this pernicious
    practice of catch and release at the border. We now catch, detain and
    return to their home country virtually everybody that comes across the
    border illegally. And that is a major step forward, not only in
    protecting our borders against terrorists, but in maintaining the
    general integrity of our country against those who come in illegally.

    We
    see real results. For the first time, we are seeing a real decline in
    the total number of illegal migrants that are trying to come across our
    nation’s southern border. It proves that the efforts we are putting
    into place are beginning to work. But we have more to do. Under the
    Secure Border Initiative, we are going to be rolling out new
    technology, new tactical infrastructure, unmanned aerial vehicles and
    other high-tech to give our Border Patrol agents the kinds of tools
    they need to do the job that we have entrusted to them.

    We
    still have a lot of work to do at the border, but we should certainly
    remark on the progress we’ve made. We are now moving in the right
    direction. And with the help of Congress, and with the continued
    support of the fine men and women who work at the border, we’re going
    to continue to make more progress.

    So that’s where we’ve
    come in screening bad people out. But what do we have to do next,
    because there remain some very significant challenges. Well, as again
    emphasized by last month’s London airline threat, we have to be able to
    determine as early as possible who is trying to come into this country
    from overseas, and who is trying to get on an airplane that might do us
    harm.

    Right now, under our current arrangement, we still
    only get full information about the identity of passengers boarding
    international air flights 15 minutes after the flight has left the
    gate. That’s simply too late. Therefore, over the next two years, we
    will implement a system that will require the airlines to transmit
    passenger information in advance of departure. This will give us the
    time to check passenger names against databases and to coordinate with
    airlines and foreign authorities to prevent a suspicious person from
    getting on an airplane before they get on the plane, rather than after
    the plane leaves the gate. And we have already begun this process of
    advanced notification for flights that come from the United Kingdom to
    the United States.

    But that only deals with the issue of
    known terrorists. The other question is, what do we do about the
    unknown terrorist, the terrorist who we have not yet identified?  How
    do we prevent that person from coming into the United States?  Well,
    there are three things we need to do. We need to get more information.
    We need to get better, more secure documentation. And we need to use
    even more our biometric technology. So let me turn to the first, more
    information.

    One of the most valuable tools we can have
    in identifying the unknown terrorist is actually already in our
    possession. It’s in our fingertips. It’s information that is routinely
    collected by the travel industry when a person makes an airline
    reservation or buys an airline ticket. They call this passenger name
    record data, and it includes such basic things as how you paid for the
    ticket, what your telephone number is, and a little bit about your
    travel history. By analyzing this kind of information, we can determine
    if an individual has traveled with a known terrorist, if their ticket
    was bought by a terrorist facilitator,  if they’ve been in phone
    communication with a terrorist. And that is precisely the kind of
    information we need to have in order to figure out whether there is an
    unidentified threat getting on an airplane. The information is there.

    Now
    we are working with the Europeans to lift some of the restrictions on
    our use of that information so we can fully analyze it before people
    get on airplanes, to prevent the unidentified terrorist from trying to
    come into this country.

    Now, I can tell you from personal
    eyewitness that this works because after the 9/11 hijacking, when I was
    the head of the criminal division, in that first 24 hours when we were
    trying to track who financed and who supported the 19 hijackers who
    went down with those airplanes, what we did is look at exactly this
    kind of data. And my plea in this country, and my plea to the Europeans
    is this:  For God’s sake, let us do that before the next 9/11, rather
    an afterwards. It’s much better to be able to do this kind of detective
    work to stop an attack, rather than to investigate an attack that has
    already occurred.

    So over the next year, I’m going to be
    looking forward to working with my European colleagues on building on
    this kind of information, allowing a full analysis, and still making
    sure we respect the privacy of those who travel internationally.

    A
    second area we need to look at is more secure documentation. And,
    again, 9/11 has a very, very vivid lesson for us. All but one of the
    9/11 hijackers who carried out the plot five years ago used American
    identification documents that they had obtained in fraudulent purposes,
    including drivers’ licenses, which enabled them to move freely around
    the country. And the 9/11 Commission, itself, focused on this use of
    fraudulent documents as a major vulnerability in our protection against
    those would come in and impersonate Americans.

    The
    solution is obvious. We have to take the advice of the 9/11 Commission
    and other experts in developing standard secure identification
    credentials that give us a high degree of confidence that an individual
    is not using phony documents to enter our country or get on airplanes
    or get into our critical infrastructure.

    The good news
    is we have underway a number of initiatives mandated by Congress that
    will do exactly that. Under our Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative,
    we are in the process of developing a secure biometric credential for
    individuals traveling in the Western Hemisphere. This card is going to
    be wallet-sized. It’s going to contain biometric — that means
    fingerprint-type security features — and it will allow for real-time
    security checks at our ports of entry.

    We’re also working
    with the states to develop standards for a secure driver’s license
    under the congressional Real ID Act. Drivers’ licenses are one of the
    most common forms of identification in this country. There’s no reason
    to facilitate the forging of these documents. We must have clear
    guidelines for how drivers’ licenses are produced, who gets them, and
    what kind of anti-forgery security features they contain.

    Now,
    all these recommendations have been out there. We are pushing forward
    on all these initiatives, but there’s one obstacle we have to overcome.
    Five years after 9/11, we’re starting to hear some complaints that
    these measures are going to be too burdensome, or too expensive, or
    that they’re somehow going to transform themselves into a national
    identification card. And that kind of back-sliding runs directly
    contrary to the lessons of 9/11, and directly contrary to the advice
    that the 9/11 Commission gave and every other expert who has looked at
    this problem has given.

    Secure identification that cannot
    be forged and cannot be exploited by terrorists is precisely what we
    need now, just as we needed it five years ago. If we’d had it five
    years ago, there would not have been a 9/11 — God help us if we don’t
    take the steps to put into place as soon as we can to prevent another
    9/11 from happening.

    And then there’s a third thing we
    can do, which would probably be, in my view, the greatest step forward
    in protecting against the unidentified terrorists. And that is building
    on the experience we’ve had with two fingerprint identification into a
    10 fingerprint identification system.

    What we are going
    to do starting this fall, for those who want to come to the United
    States, is at least on their first visit, collect 10 fingerprints —
    not just two, but 10. For those of you who are watchers of some of
    these programs like “CSI,” you know the value of latent fingerprints
    for crime detection, latent prints being what people leave when they
    touch a piece of glass or even a piece of paper.

    I can
    tell you that latent fingerprints can be equally important as a tool
    against terror, because with 10 prints taken from all visitors to the
    U.S., we will be able to run everybody’s fingerprints against latent
    fingerprints that we are collecting all over the world — in terrorist
    safe houses, off of bomb fragments the terrorists build, or at
    battlefields where terrorists wage war.

    What that means
    is, we will be able to check visitors not only against the known list
    of names that we have, but against their fingerprints picked up
    anyplace the terrorists have operated internationally. That will give
    us a real capability to locate the unidentified terrorist before he or
    she enters the country.

    And by the way, it also has a
    magnificent deterrent effect, because when we get this in place, every
    single terrorist who has ever been in a safe house or a training camp
    or built a bomb is going to have to ask himself or herself this
    question if they’re going to come in the U.S.:  Have I ever left a
    fingerprint anywhere in the world that’s been captured?  Because they
    will know that if they have, we will match that fingerprint against
    their 10 prints when they come into the country, and we will be able to
    apprehend them.

    So to promote this vision of a real
    biometric security net around this country, this year, the State
    Department will begin to deploy new 10 print fingerprint reading
    devices at U.S. visa issuing posts overseas. And by the end of 2008, we
    will have not only deployed these readers overseas, where visas are
    issued, but we will have deployed them at our ports of entry so we can
    capture fingerprints from everybody who wants to visit the United
    States.

    Now let me talk about what we’ve done since 9/11
    to monitor the cargo that’s entered our country and to prevent bad
    things from getting in. Again, five years ago, we’ve screened very few
    cargo containers entering our ports for the risk of terrorism. We
    didn’t have the ability to screen any of it overseas, and we didn’t
    have scanning equipment that would test containers for radiation.

    Without
    these tools, we had very little ability to stop someone from smuggling
    radioactive devices or other dangerous implements through our maritime
    trade system. But, again, five years later, this has dramatically
    changed. Through our National Targeting Center at Customs and Border
    Protection at DHS, every shipping container that enters the U.S. from
    overseas is analyzed for risk, and the high-risk containers are
    targeted for inspection.

    Moreover, under our Container
    Security Initiative, U.S. officials are now stationed overseas at more
    than 40 ports and are screening 80 percent of the cargo bound for the
    U.S. before it even gets on the ship that’s crossing the ocean. And by
    the end of this year, those inspectors will be in a position to screen
    90 percent of that cargo.

    In addition, focused as we are
    on the particular danger of radioactive material, we have deployed
    hundreds of radiation detection monitors and thousands of hand-held
    radiation detection devices to protect against radiological and nuclear
    threats. As a result of this massive devotion of resources to the issue
    of radiation detection, by the end of this year, we will be screening
    80 percent of maritime cargo containers arriving at U.S. ports for
    radioactive emissions. And we’re also working with almost 6,000
    companies who have voluntarily taken additional steps to enhance
    security when they ship into this country using their supply chains.

    Standing
    back and looking at what we’ve done over the years, here is a
    remarkable number often not reported in the media. If you look at the
    budget from fiscal year 2003 through the current budget proposal in
    Congress for 2007, you will see that this administration has provided
    for nearly $10 billion in port security — that’s billion with a “b” —
    and that includes the resources and manpower devoted by the United
    States Coast Guard, by Customs and Border Protection, and the research
    and development efforts of our Domestic Nuclear Detection Office.

    These
    actions have not only significantly increased the security against bad
    stuff coming in the country through our seaports, but we have been able
    to do so without sacrificing the free flow of commerce and trade that
    is essential to maintaining our economy.

    So now this is
    where we are. What do we have yet to do?  First we are going to
    complete to process of deploying radiation portal monitors to all of
    our ports of entry at sea and on land by the end of next year. And we
    will screen essentially 100 percent of cargo coming through those land
    and sea ports of entry for radiation by the end of next year.

    We’re
    also going to move overseas and continue to push to do as much of the
    screening as we can in foreign ports working with our foreign partners.
    Our goal, again, in the next two years, working with the private sector
    and our international partners, is to create an integrated system for
    scanning and imaging containers for radiation in multiple overseas
    ports, so that even before containers get on ships, we can have a high
    confidence level that they do not pose a threat to the United States.

    Additionally,
    in order to expand the protection that we are able to put into place
    with respect to the vast amount of cargo that moves around the world,
    we are increasing the extent and depth of information that we’re
    accumulating about the movement of cargo so we can have an even more
    detailed and precise picture of those containers that we need to
    physically open and inspect.

    And the point in doing all
    of this — bearing in mind, again, that bin Laden’s objective is to
    destroy our economy — the point of doing all of this is to do it in a
    way that actually furthers our economy, that actually increases
    international trade, that pursues the dual goals of security and
    prosperity in a way that advances both, without compromising either.

    Now,
    Congress has a role to play in this, too. And as I speak to you today
    there is on the floor of the Senate legislation that the House has
    passed to increase the efforts we made in port security. As we stand in
    the shadow of the 5th anniversary of 9/11, I urge Congress to complete
    its work on this port security legislation this month. That would be
    not only a fitting tribute to the 5th anniversary, but would be an
    important set of tools that we can use in achieving the goal we have
    set for ourselves over the next couple years.

    Finally,
    let me talk a little bit about the interior — because although we want
    to protect our border, we recognize that particularly radioactive
    material can even be accumulated here in the United States, itself. So,
    therefore, we have a more ambitious goal than merely protecting the
    border. We want to protect the heartland and the cities in our country,
    as well.

    Therefore, by the end of 2008, we will complete
    the first phase of what we call a Securing the Cities Program. That is
    a program — and we’re going to start in New York City — that will
    conduct nuclear and radiological scanning on the principal pathways
    into the city, whether they be overland, in the water, or underground.
    And we also intend to provide grants to two additional cities to
    purchase operational screening systems for radiation detection.

    These
    tools will allow us to build not only a layer of protection against
    weapons of mass destruction at the perimeter of the country, but it
    will allow us to build a second layer around our major cities for an
    added measure of protection.

    Now, let me turn to
    protecting our infrastructure. We know that the vast majority of
    critical infrastructure in our country is owned and maintained in
    private hands, and the government, of course, cannot by itself protect
    these critical assets and key resources. The way to do this is to work
    in partnership with federal and state and local officials, and with
    those private-sector folks who actually own the things we’re trying to
    protect.

    What have we done?  Well, let’s start with the
    aviation system. As was all too terribly demonstrated five years ago,
    before September 11th, we did not have secure cockpit doors. We did not
    have a federalized, efficient screener workforce at the airports,
    trained to detect bomb components and detonation devices. We did not
    have thousands of federal air marshals on aircraft protecting travelers
    every day all over the world. We didn’t have armed flight deck officers
    authorized and trained to defend the cockpit. We didn’t have 100
    percent screening of all passenger baggage. And we didn’t have
    thousands of explosive detection machines scanning passengers and
    baggage at airports nationwide. All of these layers of security are now
    in effect. And they now create a protective network — a fabric of
    security that keeps hundreds of thousands of air travelers safe and
    secure every day.

    Now, to be sure, there’s more to do.
    The enemy constantly adapts his tactics and his methods. And we have to
    keep pace and get ahead of those. But we have succeeded in laying over
    the last five years a solid foundation for the future of our aviation
    security efforts for the five years and the 10 years to come.

    But
    of course we can’t confine our efforts only to aviation. So since
    September 11th, we’ve looked at all of the fixed critical
    infrastructure in this country. We’ve performed thousands of
    vulnerability assessments and reviewed thousands of security plans with
    the private owners of infrastructure all across the country, including
    transportation assets, seaports, and chemical facilities.

    We’ve
    also established new ways of information sharing with the private
    sector to warn them about threats and give them advice on how to
    increase the measure of protection for their facilities. We’ve
    completed a national infrastructure protection plan, and by the end of
    this year, we will have completed specific plans for each of the major
    sectors of our national economy.

    In the area of rail and
    mass transit — and we’re certainly vividly aware of the threat there,
    as we look at attacks overseas in Madrid and London — in the area of
    rail and mass transit, we’ve invested in new technology. We have
    bio-detection sensors in many cities that sample the air to determine
    whether someone is trying to put a biological or chemical agent into a
    mass transit system or elsewhere in a city. We’re funding sensors and
    video cameras. And we’re building the capability to surge law
    enforcement when there is an emergency, including the old-fashioned,
    low-tech method of using bomb detection dogs. In all, we have provided
    more than $1.1 billion in risk-based grants that are specifically
    targeted to mass transit and other kinds of transportation systems.

    But
    again looking forward, we have more to do. And one area is the
    challenge that we face in developing a risk-based regulatory structure
    for our nation’s chemical plants and facilities. One of the lessons of
    9/11 is the intent of the enemy to turn our own technology against us.
    Five years ago, what the enemy did was they took our airplanes and they
    fashioned them into deadly missiles.

    Well, we know that
    at least some chemical plants in high populated areas could also be
    transformed into deadly agents to wreak destruction on our populace.
    Now, since 9/11, most chemical companies have recognized that threat,
    and they’ve been good corporate citizens. They have voluntarily taken
    steps to improve their security and make sure their operations and
    facilities are safe.

    But not every company has acted
    responsibly, and those few companies that don’t do the right thing put
    everybody at risk. Therefore, we must develop a balanced, common-sense
    approach for protecting the full range of chemical facilities all
    across this country. And we have to protect their surrounding
    communities, and we have to do it in a way that doesn’t destroy, of
    course, the businesses, themselves.

    In order to do that,
    the Department of Homeland Security must have the authority to set
    standards, develop the risk categories for different kinds of
    facilities, check and validate security measures, and, most important,
    insist on compliance with those security measures.

    That
    is why, today, to give us this critically needed authority, I want to
    urge Congress to pass chemical security legislation that is currently,
    again, before it. If Congress passes that legislation this month, we
    will implement it promptly through regulations that will raise the
    security for Americans all over this country.

    The fourth
    area I want to touch on briefly is intelligence, because the best way
    to protect ourselves is to stop something before it happens. And
    there’s been a painstaking review of all of the intelligence failures
    that led up to September 11th. But the good news here is that under the
    President’s strong leadership, we have succeeded in integrating and
    unifying intelligence collection and analysis across all of the
    different elements of the national intelligence community.

    At
    my own department, the Department of Homeland Security, we now have a
    strengthened and unified intelligence office led by a legendary
    intelligence official. And through our Homeland Security Information
    Network, thousands of state and local participants share information
    everyday on threats and incidents within their communities. But we can
    do more.

    We need to build deeper partnerships with our
    state and local officials to make sure that we’re not only tracking the
    high visibility international threats, but looking at the low
    visibility homegrown threats which could take root in any community in
    the country. And there the first line of intelligence collection lies
    with your local responders and your local law enforcement, because they
    will often be the first to get a sense that a homegrown threat is
    beginning to bud.

    Therefore, we’re going to expand our
    partnerships by substantially increasing our federal participation in
    state and local fusion centers all across our country. DHS has sent
    intelligence personnel to work side by side with their state and local
    counterparts at intelligence fusion centers in New York, California,
    Louisiana, and Maryland. Our goal is to have a two-way flow where
    federal, state, and local officials contribute and analyze and make use
    of intelligence information collected at every level.

    By
    the end of 2008, we will have intelligence and operations personnel at
    every major fusion center in the United States. They will be sitting in
    the same room with their local counterparts, they will be sharing and
    analyzing information with their local counterparts, and they will be
    taking steps to protect the country in real time.

    Finally,
    what do we do if there is an attack, if, has against all the measures
    we’ve taken, someone does succeed in carrying out a terrorist attack in
    this country?  And we all know that life is not without risk, and the
    possibility of such an attack remains very real.

    Well, we
    have to be prepared to respond to such attacks in a way that will
    minimize the damage and effectively aid those who need assistance as
    quickly and efficiently as possible. Over the past year, we have,
    therefore, retooled and refashioned the Federal Emergency Management
    Agency, which would be the principal means at the federal level to
    assist state and local responders if there were a need to respond to an
    emergency, whether it be a terrorist attack or natural disaster.

    We
    have given FEMA new and experienced leadership, leadership that has
    literally decades of hands-on work experience dealing with disasters,
    that is now bringing that experience to bear at the highest level. We
    have given FEMA enhanced, real-time tracking capabilities for emergency
    supplies. We’ve given them new communications systems that would
    survive the possibility of a disaster.

    We have now
    identified and put into the field experienced federal leadership to
    work with regional counterparts, particularly in high risk parts of the
    country, so that when an event occurs that requires a response, the
    federal, state and local responders will have trained together and
    exercised together. We never again want to have a circumstance where
    federal, state and local responders meet each other for the first time
    during an ongoing, catastrophic event.

    And to respond to
    the possibility of a no-notice or short-notice event, we’ve worked very
    hard in the last year, with our own operational agencies — like the
    Coast Guard, and TSA, and the air marshals — and with other agencies,
    like the Department of Defense, to create pre-positioned and
    pre-structured force packages that we could rapidly deploy to an
    incident or a disaster zone to provide an immediate capability to
    assist those who have needs and to secure an area against disorder or
    disruption.

    But here, again, we still have more work to
    do. One area in particular that requires continued action is the area
    of interoperable communications. Again, looking back five years, we
    remember the sad story of firefighters and police who entered the
    burning World Trade Center and were unable to communicate with each
    other at any level. That cost lives, and that was unacceptable. We
    cannot let that happen again.

    Therefore, we have put
    considerable effort and hundreds of millions of dollars into developing
    communications interoperability at the command level. We have achieved
    this in 10 of the highest threat cities through our RapidCom program.
    And we provided a total of $2.1 billion to states and localities since
    2003 for interoperable communications equipment, planning, training,
    and exercises.

    As we sit here today, five years after
    9/11, we have the technology that allows interoperable communications,
    that allows different jurisdictions and different agencies to talk with
    one another even if they don’t yet have the same frequencies on their
    radios. But that doesn’t mean we’ve done everything we need to do. We
    need new technology to get to the next generation, and we also have to
    assess whether we have fully deployed this equipment and trained
    ourselves to use it in a way that would stand up if there were a real
    test.

    So this year we initiated a National
    Interoperability Survey to take a hard look at the communications
    interoperability among our law enforcement, fire, and emergency medical
    service responders in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Using
    this survey, as well as a survey that’s going to be looking at
    interoperability in 75 urban areas, we’re going to take a critical eye
    and say, here’s what’s been done, but here’s what remains to be done.

    And
    I will tell you in a very straightforward way, the obstacle here is not
    technological; we have the technology. The obstacle is that we need to
    build procedures across governments and among agencies where we have
    agreement about what the rules of the road are going to be.

    This
    is something the federal government can lead. It is something the
    federal government can make recommendations about. It is something the
    federal government can test. But in the end, the decision for these
    jurisdictions and these agencies to come together and work together is
    one they, themselves, have to make. And we are going to be encouraging
    and putting a spotlight on this over the next year, because it’s very
    important we complete the job of making this technology work in real
    life in emergency circumstances.

    Five years ago, on what
    still, with some irony, seems to have been a remarkably beautiful,
    clear morning, men and women went to work in the World Trade Center,
    the Pentagon; they got on airplanes leaving from airports in the
    northeast, and they looked forward to what, I imagine, they expected
    would be a beautiful day. Those people never got to see the sun set.

    And
    the victims of 9/11 are not only those who perished, but the mothers,
    fathers, sisters, and brothers, like all of us here. Many of you, like
    me, probably lost someone that you were friendly with or even a family
    member on 9/11. Many of you have memories of the Pentagon or of the
    World Trade Center that resonate in your mind when you go back and you
    see the site of these attacks.

    And we’re reminded when we
    do go back and visit Ground Zero or look at the Pentagon of the dreams
    that perished, the plans that were never brought to fruition, and the
    lives that were snuffed out. If we ever needed a reminder, taking a
    moment on September 11th will be a very vivid reminder of the fact that
    this nation is still at war.

    Just in the last couple of
    days, bin Laden has released another video celebrating what he views as
    his accomplishment in murdering innocent people. An ideology that
    celebrates the murder of the innocent is an indecent ideology, and
    those who worship at its altar are an enemy that we cannot walk away
    from.

    This is a struggle that will be with us in years to
    come, and it is a struggle that we will win as long as we remain
    steadfast, dedicated, and balanced in the approach that we take. Over
    the last three years, the people that I am privileged to work with at
    the Department of Homeland Security have built an agency whose only
    mission is to protect the American people and to protect the homeland.

    For
    the 185,000 men and women who I serve with, this is a mission that we
    proudly undertake every single day, whether it’s patrolling the border,
    taking to the skies in helicopters over our oceans, or patrolling in
    boats or in subway stations all over the country. I turn to them and I
    turn to you and say, we can win this struggle, and we can do it in a
    way that will preserve the values and the freedom and the way of life
    that we cherish, but we can only do it if we remember that the greatest
    strength is the spirit that we bring.

    If we recognize
    that the only people who can defeat us are ourselves, and as long as we
    remember the bond that ties us together, the importance of what we do,
    the faith that we cherish — if we remember that, we will succeed in
    this mission.

    I hope that five years from now the only
    attack that people have to remember in this country remains that first
    attack on September 11th. And I tell you, on behalf of the people of
    the Department of Homeland Security, that all of us will work
    tirelessly every single day and night to do everything we can to try to
    make sure that that dream remains true.

    Thank you very much.

    ###

    Department of Labor Backlog Center Opens Online Case Status Check

    09/13/2006

    The Department of Labor recently initiated an online case status check system for two Backlog
    Centers.
    If a case is approved, the search result is: “Certified,” otherwise, it is “In Process” or “Data Review.”

    USCIS Limitations on I-140 Premium Processing

    From the USCIS Website:

    Are there any additional conditions of availability being placed on the Premium Processing Service at this time?

    Yes. This will accord USCIS the flexibility to adapt to
    contingencies affecting its ability to provide Premium Processing
    Service. Premium Processing Service is available for the Form I-140
    classifications indicated on the chart above provided that the case
    does not involve:

    1. A second filing of a Form I-140 petition while an initial Form I-140 remains pending;

    2. Labor Certification substitution requests; and

    3. Duplicate Labor Certification requests (i.e., cases filed without
    an original labor certification from the Department of labor).

    USCIS is prescribing these additional conditions of availability on
    Premium Processing for Form I-140 because of their special processing
    requirements, including locating and transferring other files or
    documents internally and requesting initial evidence from an outside
    agency, that make it difficult for USCIS to guarantee that it will
    process the case within a 15 calendar day period.