Michael Scheuer


Michael Scheuer, author of Marching Toward Hell: America and Islam After Iraq, discusses why he thinks the al Qaeda threat will continue to grow while the US occupies Muslim countries, why the Israel/Palestine dispute isn’t worth sacrificing American blood or treasure for, how US disengagement from the Middle East will allow Muslims to concentrate on their own considerable internal problems, humanitarian warmongers on the Left who are pushing for intervention in Africa, al Qaeda’s thorough infiltration of Yemen and why the US practice of torturing terrorism suspects should continue until more effective methods can be found.

MP3 here. (32:02)

Michael Scheuer is a 22-year veteran of the CIA and former head analyst at the CIA’s bin Laden unit. He is the author of Marching Toward Hell: America and Islam After Iraq and Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror.

35 thoughts on “Michael Scheuer”

  1. If torturing "terrorists" is OK, how long before torturing white guys like me is OK? It wasn't that long ago that the Rep. governor of Illinois had to pardon everyone on death row, because so many had confessed under torture by the Chicago police (mostly to benefit the career of Richie Daley, then Cook County Prosecutor.)

    1. Chicago Cops are know for breaking the law and violence is common in Cook County Jail.

      Michael Scheuer is a brave man who deserves respect for his views. If people knew all that he does (CIA Frm Head of Bin Laden Unit) <>they would see he is right. Israel is not worth a penny or a drop of American blood. We need more men like Michael Scheuer!!!

    2. We're not talking about criminals, most criminals are willing to confess either in the interrogation room or when in court. So waterboarding isn't going to be used domestically in the US

  2. I didn't hear/see Michael Scheuer on Lou Dobbs or Glen Beck, so I don't know whether he was giving "the other side of his argument that the rightwingers want to hear." But that is the same thing I have noticed about Patrick Buchanan. He seems to write one thing in his articles that appear on Antiwar.com. But when I see him on the McLaughlin Group, MSNBC and other MSM outlets, he sounds like a pro-war conservative Republican. These people need to offer a consistent analysis on foreign policy, or what they have to say becomes expedient hypocrisy.

    1. I've noticed the same thing re: Pat Buchanan. My guess is there's some kind of cognitive dissonance going on with people like him and Scheuer: on the one hand, they're critics of the current American power establishment; but on the other, they're kneejerk "patriots" who feel a need to defend the United States from attack, verbal or otherwise.

      1. I noticed the same thing about these two, the duality. When they write an article or book, they have one mindset. When they go on the TeeVee, they have another(Right-wing reactionary douchebag). Maybe they should start wearing a goatee when in their Evil persona?

  3. Anyone else confused here? Our foreign policy is the root of the problem, so we need to do a better job with our military assault along the Afghan-Pak border–oh, and torture some more people, at least until we figure out something better to do. I thought in the beginning he said we should just get the hell out.

    1. When he talks about violence & torture he has a way of shocking you with a sort of vicious casualness about it, then backs that up by asserting it's the only option -often Obama's fault in his view- and flag waving a bit. Usually it was Action first, then Rationale, then America. I'm not always sure HE's not confused.

      Also, his faith in OBL's longevity, especially this "voice print" bit (is that from Dr. Who, or is that really the term used?), is at odds with Phil Giraldi's here:
      as well as PG's last interview.

      1. "voice print" is indeed a common term. For example:

        "Security system using biometric technology: Design and implementation of Voice Recognition System (VRS) in: Computer and Communication Engineering, 2008. 13-15 May 2008

        Biometric technology is fast gaining popularity as means of security measures to reduce cases of fraud and theft due to its use of physical characteristics and traits for the identification of individuals. The earliest methods of biometric identification included fingerprint and handwriting while more recent ones include iris/eye scan, face scan, voice print, and hand print. Biometric voice recognition and identification technology focuses on training the system to recognize an individualpsilas unique voice characteristics (i.e., their voice print). The technology lends itself well to a variety of uses and applications, including security access control for cell phones (to eliminate cell phone fraud), ATM manufacturers (to eliminate pin # fraud) and automobile manufacturers (to dramatically reduce theft and carjacking). In this paper, we present an implementation of a security system based on voice identification as the access control key. Verification algorithm is developed using MATLAB (SIMULINK) function blocks which is capable of authenticating a personpsilas identity by his or her voice pattern. A voice match will produce logic dasia1psila while a mismatch, logic dasia0psila. A microcontroller circuit controlling access to a door is built to test the reliability of this voice controlled security system. It is found out that the developed voice recognition software has successfully activated the door opening mechanism using a voice command that ONLY works for the authenticated individual. The system is proven to be able to provide medium-security access control and also has an adjustable security level setting to account for the variations in onepsilas voice each time a voice identification occurs. "

  4. Pat Buchanan has made a lot of money selling books. I would imagine he gets a good-sized check whenever he goes on TV, too. Same-same for Scheuer?

    1. I wish she would come out into the public again, Indira Singh. I haven't heard hide nor hair from her since she was threatened by the drug lords to protect their monopoly on al qaeda, or the 1st name given to the money laundering, software scheme (the 'base') that passes these crook's stench filled muffins past the gateway into the 'normal' bakery of everyday economy… And, what about Tommy Tamm?!!!

  5. I believe Mr. Sheuer is slightly incorrect when he says “that Muslim’s hate each other – in some cases – more than they hate America”. It is true that there are several divisions in the Arab world and that the house of Saud and Egypt are generally reviled. But Arabs do not wish to see Egypt and Saudi Arabia destroyed but rather for them to break off their alliances with the Arab worlds occupiers (Israel and the United States). Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria form a quartet which is currently attempting to reintegrate Saudi Arabia into the Arab world. The United States though to the Arab world is the root of all its problems both historically and politically. This does not mean all Arabs hate America, no, on the contrary many Arabs recognise the spell America’s citizens are under and thus point their anger carefully; it is the reactionary few that blame the many.

  6. Curiously American media has historically neglected a detailed account of America and Israel’s behaviour in the region and in doing so has created an internal as well as external problem. The citizens of the United States having been successfully deprived of information voted for what they thought were honourable men and women. These men and women continued the savagery of the Middle East while the media wilfully neglected the details. As a result Americans having been attacked (after decades of abuse against the Middle East) cannot seem to understand why they are so hated. Citizens then react based on information ready made to protect the offending ‘honourable’ men and women they voted for from the embarrassment of the murders they have committed in America’s name.

  7. As a balance to Scheuer's nuanced view of generating sado-fiction from an adjacent room, how 'bout Craig Murray's story? (Here, especially around 2:30 onwards ): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pgobHBv5qM

    Around 3:45 : "…I said we are getting intelligence which is not true. I was told 'it is operationally useful.' Nobody ever argued with me when I said it was untrue, but they said it was 'operationally useful'…."

  8. As a balance to Scheuer's nuanced view of generating sado-fiction from an adjacent room, how 'bout Craig Murray's story? (Here, especially around 2:30 onwards ): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pgobHBv5qM

    Around 3:45 : "…I said we are getting intelligence which is not true. I was told 'it is operationally useful.' Nobody ever argued with me when I said it was untrue, but they said it was 'operationally useful'…."

    1. "Operationally useful" unfortunately means you know that someone's sister-in-law often invites a bearded men into her house at 20:00 local time, so you decide to send a killbot with hellfire missiles to take a look-see and prepare a press statement.

  9. Buchanan and others have to be careful what they say on TV. They would never be allowed on if they didn't. Even Ron Paul never takes on Israel. He attacks foreign aid and our everseas entanglements but never directly attacks the heinious crimes committed by the Israelies. All these people make good points about what is going on. It is just that they have to be careful how they say it. The zionists, who control the media, would never allow people like you and me on. Try to call any talk show and place the true facts of the Middle East out there. You will be cut off at once. Of the whole gang Buchanan has been the most consistent against war for the longest time and still is allowed on the air.

  10. What did I do to have my privilges revoked. I have been writing on this site for years and all my posts have been civil and on point. It's your site but i don't deserve such treatment.

  11. Jewish political power is strong that anyone who criticizes Israel is labeled an anti-semite. This now includes Ron Paul, Jimmy Carter, Pat Buchanan and anyone else that dares question Zionism. The War on Terror is a war for Israel (Zionism).

  12. Whether one is pro or con Michael Scheuer one should as minimum consider himself/herself as being bombed on a daily basis by missiles, drone planes,embargoed, sanctioned and be next to a neighbir that gets some $ 17 million dollars a day every day of the year
    from a major power that is 10,000 miles away.

    Have their children neighbors and afmiles killed at a dailly rate of some 20/24 by the same foreigners AND YOU STILL LOVE AND RESPECT THEM. IF YOU DO YOU ARE NOT NORMAL.


  13. Boy, I recently saw Scheuer on Fox and I certainly didn't hear this sort of stuff when he was interviewed? Seems he's not consistent depending on the media outlet. Good for Scott for calling him out on this.

  14. What happened at the end there? Everything seemed to be fairly clear and reasonable and then the
    mental fog rolled in, Mr. Scheuer suddenly regressed in to a bumbling idiot. He stated in so many words that "the US should continue the practice of torturing terrorist suspects until more effective methods can be found".
    Excuse me but didn't Mr. Scheuer already point out the "more effective method" to be used?
    Which was to get our military "death machine" out of these countries in the first place. These
    incredibly stupid and irresponsible policies of military occupation and warfare are leading to the exponential growth of the problem and bankrupting this country in the process.

  15. Until our foreign policy changes (which is currently nothing but state sponsored terrorism) our country will continue to be a target for violence and hatred. I would think that Mr Scheuer would know better than to support torture of any kind for any kind of "civilized" justification.
    In addition, when one considers the fact that most of the so called "terrorists" that were rounded up and sent to Guantamano were innocent of involvement with terrorist organizations and yet they were
    still tortured and abused, many of them are still there. No wonder the US government doesn't want to release them. After the abuse they have received by our PR specialists they certainly may become "enemy combatants" after what they have been through. It seems to me that we have a foreign policy that works hard to create enemies and seems to do very little or nothing to create friends. Are these morons who control our foreign policy secretly working for Osama Bin Laden in charge of recruitment for his organization? It sure seems like it.

  16. "most of the so called "terrorists" that were rounded up and sent to Guantamano were innocent"

    That's nonsense, 3 mistakes out of more than 400 detainees isn't 'most'. What rubbish

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.