Michael Scheuer was let out of the CIA by Portor Goss's predeccessor so that he could go blow smoke across the CIA failures of the 1990s,
and so he could go falsely blame our foreign policy instead of admitting just how little they, the CIA actually knew and understood about:
(1)Al Queda,
(2)its basis in radical Islamic fundamentalist philosophy - not reactions to U.S. policy -
and
(3) just how deep the radical philosophy was penetrating Islamic societies and creating public push in those societies for changes in the policies of Islamic nations, to fulfill the goals of the radical philosophy - movement toward a world Islamic caliphate.
The CIA failed in the 1990s and continues to fail because it is more ignorant about the philosophical movement - and the depth and breadth of that movement - that underpins the terrorists than most western high school kids were about communism in the 1960s.
We lost nothing when people like Schuerer were let out of the CIA so they could author misinformation that blames the policians for the CIAs failures.
(1)Al Queda,
I rarely have a kind word to say about the CIA, but to say that they didn't understand Bin Laden is simply false. They had Clinton to deal with, and he wasn't interested in doing anything that had a whiff of risk on it.
(2)its basis in radical Islamic fundamentalist philosophy - not reactions to U.S. policy -
At the core of al-Qa'ida, they couldn't care less about U.S. policy, because they're religious fanatics. But, the reason that the U.S. policy angle sells so well in the Middle East is that most people there live under the boot of U.S. backed dictatorships, like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, etc. They see their own governments as cowards and bullies who sell their people out to stay rich and live like kings, and arm themselves with U.S. firepower. Islam totally notwithstanding, that's a huge factor in AQ's attraction as a resistance movement.
and (3) just how deep the radical philosophy was penetrating Islamic societies and creating public push in those societies for changes in the policies of Islamic nations, to fulfill the goals of the radical philosophy - movement toward a world Islamic caliphate.
That's true, in the same way that global Communism appealed to many purely nationalistic movements. It was a source of power that helped them achieve a goal, even as it corrupted them along the way.
Jihadist backers are no different than Soviet ones. They have a seductive sounding offer that promises power, support, and a unifying ideal. It seeks to tap into genuine local problems, and to pervert them for other uses, though. Still, 8th century Islam wouldn't be persuasive at all in the absence of major injustice in the region. As Americans, we have a hard time understanding what repressed and powerless people will sell out to in order to be free, even if it means trading one devil for another.