Global Security and Intelligence Studies
The law clearly emphasizes foreign nationals working on behalf of a foreign power and lacks detail about individual terrorists operating alone . Moreover , despite a definition of international terrorism in section 101 ( c ), there lacks discussion of an individual terrorist . This absent detail seems small but has tremendous implications ; consider Zacharias Moussaoui ’ s involvement ( the assumed “ 20 th hijacker ”) in the plot on September 11 , 2001 . As stated in a report from the Department of Justice Inspector General :
The Minnesota FBI and FBI Headquarters differed as to whether a warrant could be obtained and what the evidence in the Moussaoui case suggested . FBI Headquarters did not believe sufficient grounds existed for a criminal warrant , and it also concluded that a FISA warrant could not be obtained because it believed Moussaoui could not be connected to a foreign power as required under FISA (“ Special Report : A Review of the FBI ’ s Handling of Intelligence Information Related to the September 11 Attacks ( Full Report )” 2006 , 101 ).
The lack of direct connection to a foreign power — Moussaoui did not “ qualify ” as an agent of a foreign power under the FISA definition — limited the USIC ’ s , and more specifically , the FBI ’ s , legal options . Closing this loophole might not have prevented the attack on the World Trade Center , but it illustrates a specific problem . These types of issues proved even more problematic as the United States entered the twenty-first century , and the focus of national security moved to the terrorist threat .
Looking broadly , back in the late twentieth century , legislators did provide law enforcement and the USIC some legal mechanisms to deal with terrorism , but often it seemed the legislation and policy struggled to “ catch up ” and adapt in the wake of increased terrorist attacks . From a legal perspective , existing laws and policy covered small groups because the law applies just the same as to a larger group if they can demonstrate linkage to an international organization , but lone wolf terrorism , or the distinction of individual terrorists versus those affiliated with groups , did not really appear within the terrorism lexicon before 1995 . As such , laws and policy addressing this unique aspect of political violence did not exist . In contrast , individuals , especially those not working on behalf of a foreign power , would not fall under the purview of these old laws , so law enforcement based their prosecutions on criminal statutes treating the suspects no differently from “ regular ” criminals .
From an academic and research perspective , there are further problems . If scholars wish to seek out instances of terrorism when searching through legal records , the difficulty lies in determining prosecutions based on violations of terrorism statutes and those based on criminal laws . Since the primary goal in terrorism investigations for law enforcement is to mitigate the threat by any means , prosecuting individuals for a lesser charge , say money laundering or selling counterfeit
8