• news
  • SUNDAY JUNE 19 2005 4:50 PM

FBI: Knowledge of Terrorism Doesn't Matter

Submitted by jake_lex

Edited by MissTyrios

With the expanded powers of the FBI under the Patriot Act, it might be nice to get agents who know something about terrorism and Middle Eastern culture. When making decisions about who runs anti-terrorism efforts in the FBI, though, the FBI doesn't agree.

The FBI's current terror-fighting chief, Executive Assistant Director Gary Bald, said his first terrorism training came "on the job" when he moved to headquarters to oversee anti-terrorism strategy two years ago.

Asked about his grasp of Middle Eastern culture and history, Bald responded: "I wish that I had it. It would be nice."

"You need leadership. You don't need subject matter expertise," Bald testified in an ongoing FBI employment case. "It is certainly not what I look for in selecting an official for a position in a counterterrorism position."

In a development that has escaped public attention, FBI agent Bassem Youssef has questioned under oath many of the FBI's top leaders, including Director Robert Mueller and his predecessor, Louis Freeh, in an effort to show he has passed over for top terrorism jobs despite his expertise. Testimony from his lawsuit was recently sent to Congress.

Those who have held the bureau's top terrorism fighting jobs since Sept. 11 often said in their testimony that they — and many they have promoted since — had no significant terrorism or Middle East experience. Some could not even explain the difference between Sunnis and Shiites, the two primary groups of Muslims.

"Probably the strongest leader I know in counterterrorism has no counterterrorism in his background," Bald insisted.


The FBI has promoted those agents who worked on previous cases to the top positions in its anti-terrorist unit. The agency has not promoted those who had any actual training or expertise in how terrorist organizations work. This stands in marked contrast to Director Louis Freeh's promise that agents would possess a body of expertise on terrorism that would not only prosecute actual terrorist acts, but work to prevent them as well.

This all leads to the question: why should our civil rights be assaulted to give this organization more ways to invade our privacy when they seem determined to continue the same ways that kept them from stopping 9/11 in the first place? They seem to be choosing institutional politics over fighting terror.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Comments
Keith

Keith

Oklahoma City, OK
August 2002

JUN 19, 2005 04:51 PM

I feel safer already. whatever

MissTyrios

misstyrios

NEWSWIRE

Allston, MA

JUN 19, 2005 04:54 PM

It is these two quotes from the article that disturb me the most:


"A crime scene in a bank robbery case is the same as a crime scene, you know, across the board."


and

When asked whether he, as the FBI's former counterterrorism chief, could describe the differences between Shiite and Sunni Muslims, Watson answered, "Not technically, no."

MetaTag

MetaTag

United Kingdom
September 2002

JUN 19, 2005 05:16 PM

Many chemical companies are run by ex accounts, with no training in chemistry; and that does not stop them from making good business decisions.

Similarly, the head of the FBI does not investigate terrorism, he directs those that do and his lack of Middle Eastern knowledge is not as critical as it first seems.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

JUN 19, 2005 05:43 PM

MissTyrios said:
It is these two quotes from the article that disturb me the most:

When asked whether he, as the FBI's former counterterrorism chief, could describe the differences between Shiite and Sunni Muslims, Watson answered, "Not technically, no."


Oh come on, thats like the first day in Islam 101!

One of them believe that the church of Islam should be directed by the religious leadership, and the other believes it should be directed by the lineage of Muhammad the prophet.

I bet he knows who friggin Martin Luther is. whatever

DoubleJesus

DoubleJesus

Fredericton, NB
March 2005

JUN 19, 2005 05:50 PM

I thought it was mostly the cia and nsa who were responsible for foreign intelligence in the US... Maybe i'm wrong but it doesn't seem like that big a deal if this guy doesn't know a whole lot.

corymeyer

corymeyer

Altamonte Springs, FL
August 2002

JUN 19, 2005 06:20 PM

I agree with the FBI.

Subrosa

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA
July 2004

JUN 19, 2005 06:23 PM

DeepDish said:
I agree with the FBI.



I don't.

jake_lex

jake_lex

Lexington, KY
February 2003

JUN 19, 2005 06:30 PM

DoubleJesus said:
I thought it was mostly the cia and nsa who were responsible for foreign intelligence in the US... Maybe i'm wrong but it doesn't seem like that big a deal if this guy doesn't know a whole lot.




But it's the duty of the FBI to do the actual cop work here, to take the info the CIA, NSA, etc. is supposed to give them, and figure out exactly what to do. They're the ones that actually go get the terrorists, for the most part.

A problem with the FBI actually stopping terrorism has been their inability to really see what's going on with the data they have. Their current actions don't seem to indicate that they are doing anything to alleviate that.

seanvegas

seanvegas

Lincoln, NE
December 2004

JUN 19, 2005 06:37 PM

Keith said:
I feel safer already. whatever



Yes! I agree with your sarcasm. If this government wants to continue fear mongering, then they're doing a good job of it by putting anti terrorist jobs in the hands of these dip shits! mad

freshprncebelair

freshprncebelair

Ellicott City, MD
June 2004

JUN 19, 2005 06:39 PM

MetaTag said:
Many chemical companies are run by ex accounts, with no training in chemistry; and that does not stop them from making good business decisions.

Similarly, the head of the FBI does not investigate terrorism, he directs those that do and his lack of Middle Eastern knowledge is not as critical as it first seems.



No way, that makes too much sense!

Seriously though, they picked him for his leadership/managerial skills, not his knowledge of the topic matter. Anyone who is knowledgeble enough will be placed under him, and it is his responsibility to leverage the talents of the people under him to get the job done, which he probably will.

FrankMask

FrankMask

Saint Paul, MN
June 2003

JUN 19, 2005 06:47 PM

I think The Prince and Sun Tzu both talk extensively about having knowledge of who your enemy is and how he thinks, and also of knowing the terrain on which you will be fighting. If the current director of the FBI does not have knowledge of the middle east, the Islamic religion, or the process and procedure of terrorism, then he is not qualified to lead the FBI in countering Terrorist organizations that follow a version of Islam.

fountainofdreams

fountainofdreams

Batavia, IL
January 2005

JUN 19, 2005 07:05 PM

skankzor said:

MetaTag said:
Many chemical companies are run by ex accounts, with no training in chemistry; and that does not stop them from making good business decisions.

Similarly, the head of the FBI does not investigate terrorism, he directs those that do and his lack of Middle Eastern knowledge is not as critical as it first seems.



No way, that makes too much sense!

Seriously though, they picked him for his leadership/managerial skills, not his knowledge of the topic matter. Anyone who is knowledgeble enough will be placed under him, and it is his responsibility to leverage the talents of the people under him to get the job done, which he probably will.



that would make sense for the head of the FBI, or maybe that person's deputy...but the head of the terrorism division? are you fucking serious?

freshprncebelair

freshprncebelair

Ellicott City, MD
June 2004

JUN 19, 2005 07:08 PM

ashmanonar said:

skankzor said:

MetaTag said:
Many chemical companies are run by ex accounts, with no training in chemistry; and that does not stop them from making good business decisions.

Similarly, the head of the FBI does not investigate terrorism, he directs those that do and his lack of Middle Eastern knowledge is not as critical as it first seems.



No way, that makes too much sense!

Seriously though, they picked him for his leadership/managerial skills, not his knowledge of the topic matter. Anyone who is knowledgeble enough will be placed under him, and it is his responsibility to leverage the talents of the people under him to get the job done, which he probably will.



that would make sense for the head of the FBI, or maybe that person's deputy...but the head of the terrorism division? are you fucking serious?




Well, he is the Executive Assistant Director. And they specifically cite in the article that they were looking for someone with leadership experience mainly.

DoubleJesus

DoubleJesus

Fredericton, NB
March 2005

JUN 19, 2005 07:25 PM

i don't think it's the fbi's job to do the analyzing. I'm pretty sure there is actual analysts who look at the data at the source. I'm sure someone combs through all the suspects that they have, and gather the data that they need. I mean i don't think they collect piles of data then just give it to the fbi.

Arrus

Arrus

Olathe, KS
March 2005

JUN 19, 2005 08:11 PM

Look at the heads of Clear Channel, not a music major in the bunch, which is why they are so loved. Remember knowledge is power.... skull

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

featured interviews