It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


POLITICS: FBI Didn't Seek to Hire Terror Experts

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 04:11 PM
During sworn testimony, FBI managers stated that when promoting agents to fight the War on Terror, expertise in Terrorism and the Middle East was not a determining factor. And still today the managers do not believe the expertise in those fields to be relavent to promoting agents. Executive Assistant Director Gary Bald has stated that Leadership qualities are what is needed rather than subject matter expertise.
n 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 was 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 hundreds of pages of testimony obtained by The Associated Press contrast with assurances Mueller repeatedly has given Congress that he was building a new FBI, from top to bottom, with experts able to stop terrorist attacks before they occurred, not solve them afterward.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

While I do agree that leadership qualities are a very important aspect of being a field agent, I cant help but shake my head in disbelief over Balds thoughts about subject matter expertise. Some of the agents as stated above, did not know the difference Sunnis and Shiites. I was under the impression that in order to beat your enemy, you should know your enemy. As the old saying goes, keep your friends close and your enemies even closer.

[edit on 6/19/05 by Kidfinger]

[edit on 6/19/05 by Kidfinger]

posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 06:46 PM
This is taken from an FBI memo released in 1998 entitled ENSURING PUBLIC SAFETY AND NATIONAL SECURITY UNDER THE RULE OF LAW.

State-sponsored terrorism is no longer the only terrorism problem. There are new terrorists--loosely organized groups and ad hoc coalitions motivated by perceived injustices or ideologies, along with domestic groups and disgruntled individual American citizens. They have attacked the U.S. at home and abroad. Terrorists represent the very worst of criminals--they attack without regard to the lives of their victims, and they generate fear intended to intimidate nations and democracies. The growing and changing threat of terrorism in the United States has required a well-coordinated and decisive response from the federal law enforcement community. For example, the FBI established a Counterterrorism Center in 1996 after the Federal Building in Oklahoma City was bombed. Eighteen federal agencies maintain a presence in the Center. It was created to strengthen the FBI's ability to track potential terrorist threats, prevent attacks, and investigate events that do occur. The Center has provided invaluable assistance in recent terrorist incidents, including the attacks on the United States Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

FBI Report

This clearly shows that as early as 1996, the FBI was aware of terrorism and the direction it was heading. If this information was known in 1996, then why wasnt the FBI seeking expertise in terrorism for promotion? How can anyone say that a good working knowledge of the enemy will not be an effective quality of a field agent? It seems to me that knowledge of terrorism can only help in the pursuit of terrorist. Are you going to send a banker to harvest crops?

posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 07:16 PM
Whomever voted no for bised, could you please explain to me where the bias in the opening paragraph is? I stated only facts with no spin. While the last paragraph may sound bias, it is allowed to have that tone. This is the paragraph where I am to present my opinion and as such, will always be a take on my views.

[edit on 6/19/05 by Kidfinger]

posted on Jun, 27 2005 @ 04:00 PM
I think our security departments could use more terorism experts.
Are these promotions connected in any way to quotas, whereby the most qualified would not necessarily get promoted.

posted on Jun, 27 2005 @ 04:23 PM
Personally, I think something hinkie is going on at the FBI. They're reported to be soft on terror over and over and over again. What do I mean? Well, FBI declined to investigate terror activities prior to 9/11. Despite public assurances, that stance has continued.

A probe into suspected Al Qaeda fund-raising was blocked by the FBI in a petty turf war, a customs chief said last night.
Joe Webber, a Sept. 11 survivor and now chief of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Houston, said FBI chiefs stood in the way of his probe. And he alleged they barred it because the information came from outside the bureau - despite President Bush's directive that law enforcement agencies must work together to beat terrorism.

posted on Jun, 27 2005 @ 06:05 PM
the FBI 'monitor' they monitor everything.
action? thats someone elses job

watch the online documentary, 'the man who knew'

new topics

top topics

log in