British jihadist let into US despite convictions
British man who held hostages at synagogue entered country despite string of convictions
Authorities in the US were last night facing difficult questions after it emerged that the British jihadist who was shot dead by the FBI on Saturday after taking three people hostage at a synagogue in Texas had been granted entry to the country despite having a string of criminal convictions. Blackburn-born Malik Faisal Akram, who was banned from his local magistrates’ court for ranting about the 9/11 attacks, had flown to New York at the end of December on a tourist visa.
THE US authorities were last night facing difficult questions after it emerged that the British jihadist who carried out a terror attack at the weekend had been granted entry to the country despite having a string of criminal convictions.
Blackburn-born Malik Faisal Akram, who was once banned from his local magistrates’ court for ranting about the 9/11 attacks, flew to New York at the end of December. Despite a series of “red flag warnings” about his behaviour Akram was granted a tourist visa and was able to travel from New York to Texas where he bought a firearm and took three men hostage at a synagogue.
After a tense standoff, his prisoners managed to escape when the rabbi, Charlie Cytron-walker, threw a chair at Akram and fled, allowing the FBI to storm the building and shoot him dead.
Mr Cytron-walker described how Akram, 44, became increasingly agitated as his demands to release a female al-qaeda terrorist, Aafia Siddiqui, from a Texan jail were not met. He said: “The last hour or so of the standoff, he wasn’t getting what he wanted. We were terrified. The exit wasn’t too far away. I told them to go, I threw a chair at the gunman and I headed for the door.
“And all three of us were able to get out without even a shot being fired.”
While the rabbi and the other hostages were praised for their bravery, US officials have been accused of “dropping the ball” after missing a series of warning signs. Convicted criminals are usually denied entry to the US, but Akram – who has served three prison sentences – was granted a tourist visa after simply lying on his application.
The Daily Telegraph can reveal that his criminal history dates back to 1996, when he was jailed for violent disorder following a baseball attack on a member of his extended family. He was given a six month sentence, but was jailed again the following year after being found guilty of destroying property.
In 1999 he was again behind bars following a conviction for harassment and after being let out on licence he breached the terms of his release and was returned to prison.
In 2012 he was remanded in custody after being accused of stealing a phone and almost £5,000 from a man in Chorley. However, he was released on bail and the case against him did not proceed. But while being held at HMP Liverpool, he was reported by the prison imam for “concerning and disruptive behaviour” at Friday prayers.
Akram was a regular visitor to Pakistan and was understood to be a member of Tablighi Jamaat, an Islamic organisation banned by Saudi Arabia.
It is believed he was radicalised in Blackburn in the last five years and according to locals would regularly take part in anti-israel demonstrations and marches for the release of Muslim prisoners at Guantánamo Bay.
Akram’s brother, Gulbar, said he had mental health problems and questioned how he had been allowed into the US.
He said: “He’s known to police. Got a criminal record. How was he allowed to get a visa and acquire a gun?”
One US senator, who has been briefed on the case by the Department for Homeland Security and a former Pentagon official, told The Telegraph: “Certainly someone let the ball drop.”
A former neighbour of Akram said: “What surprised me was not so much what he did, but how America let him in. The guy has got a huge criminal record. He had a car accident in 2017-18 and broke his back. I don’t know if that affected his head but he was not right.”
After arriving at JFK Airport, Akram travelled to Texas by coach, checking into a homeless shelter in Dallas. He spent two weeks at the centre during which time it is understood he bought a gun from off the street. He knocked on the door of the Congregation Beth Israel synagogue in Colleyville pretending he was looking for shelter.
A US official told The Telegraph there was no information on America’s intelligence databases to suggest Akram should be denied entry.
Last night Congregation Beth Israel said it would hold a special service to “put this terrible event behind us”.
It came as a second man, Jeffrey Cohen, broke his silence on the ordeal. “First of all, we escaped. We weren’t released or freed,” said Mr Cohen, who works for Nasa’s Johnson Space Center. He said the hostages attempted “to keep the gunman engaged”.
“He lectured us. I asked him questions. As long as he was talking and somewhat calm, we bought the FBI time to position,” he said.
Given the difficulties most people face travelling anywhere at the moment, it is perplexing that a British man with known extremist views managed to fly to the United States, live in a homeless shelter and purchase a gun which he then used to hold a rabbi and three Jewish worshippers hostage in a synagogue.
Mercifully, none were physically harmed, though their captor, Malik Faisal Akram from Blackburn, Lancs, was shot dead by police. President Joe Biden called the incident “an act of terror” though Akram’s family maintain that he was mentally ill. Whatever the motivation, the checks that should be carried out both here and in America to ensure extremists are not able to travel willy-nilly appear to have broken down.
Akram is said to have had a criminal record and was once even banned from court buildings in his hometown for making extremist comments about the 9/11 attacks in America. He is believed to have arrived in the country two weeks ago, which means he must have been granted a visa despite his background.
Was he known to security agencies in the UK and if so why was he able to travel so easily? There is a requirement for arrivals in the US to state their destination yet Akram ended up in a homeless shelter.
There appear to be serious shortcomings here that need to be addressed with complete transparency. Perhaps Akram’s past offending was deemed too petty to trouble the authorities and he was able to travel as a tourist without hindrance. But the facts need to be established. This could have ended in a far greater tragedy than it turned out to be.