Complicit or clueless?

Not all criminal collaboration is witting. Sometimes, it's unwitting, as when you buy a Borsalino at a tremendous discount in a hat store without realizing that it "fell off a truck" a week ago and was "found" by a member of organized crime and sold to your haberdasher. The question we have to ask ourselves today, in light of the evidence provided at the Bassem Youssef lawsuit against the FBI, is: was the FBI's criminal collaboration with terrorists since 9/11 witting, or unwitting?

FBI agent Youssef has testified concerning the Bureau's position on hiring counterterrorism experts, particularly Arab language and culture experts, in the wake of 9/11: it seems they don't want to. After all the hype of the 9/11 Commission and the billions of taxpayer dollars poured into Homeland Security, and all the promises of the FBI, it's business as usual at the J Edgar Hoover Building.

FBI terrorism chief, Dale Watson, could not identify the difference between a Shi'ite and a Sunni Muslim. "Not technically, no," he responded when asked.

FBI Assistant Executive Director Gary Bald, when asked about his knowledge of Arab culture, religion, and history, replied "I wish that I had that. It would be nice."

It would be nice?

Watson claims that one should only approach a terrorism case the way one would approach any criminal investigation. No additional expertise is necessary. No special knowledge of the Middle East is required when going after Al-Qaeda. And when hiring counter-terrorism executives, the only real requirement is "leadership". Nothing else is important. Nothing else matters. Not even an ability to deal effectively with foreign governments.

Is it any wonder Muslim conspiracy theorists believe that American intelligence engineered the atrocities of 9/11? We obviously have no real desire or commitment to fight -- or even a desire to understand -- terrorism.

[...]

FBI agent Bassem Youssef was passed over for promotion at the Bureau, even though his record -- particularly his counter-terrorism record in working on Middle Eastern cases and in Middle Eastern countries, such as Saudi Arabia where the lion's share of 9/11 hijackers came from -- is impeccable and meritorious. He was a crack interrogator, a fine hand at lie detector tests in Arab countries in the Arab language, and awarded many medals for his service in the fight against terrorism. Yet, he was being assigned to a post overseeing budgets when this all came down.

[...]

So? witting, or unwitting? Is the FBI evil, or just stupid? Is it a case of conspiracy or competency? I think the problem is the Feebs are much more at home going after Americans than furriners. The last time they resisted dealing with a foreign culture was during the Hoover era, when Hoover proclaimed there was no such thing as an Italian organized crime network. Now, under FBI Director Robert Mueller, we are being told that dealing with Al-Qaeda is essentially no different than dealing with a bunch of bank robbers.

I can't help but wonder what frilly underthings Director Mueller has hiding in his wardrobe.

  Sinister Forces post

My guess would be that at the top of the organization are those who are witting, evil and complicit, while most of the rest tend to be unwitting and clueless. There's always that "need to know" dictum in secret and secretive organizations that permits such a set-up.

Director Mueller could fall into either category, however, since those at the top of agencies aren't necessarily in charge of them.