American Libraries

Stephen M. Kohn: On behalf of myself and I my client, I would like to thank the American Librarian Association for having us here. This is the first time Mr. Youssef is actually speaking in a public forum. He has done a couple of media interviews, but he has never really answered the public's questions. I thought this was the appropriate place to do it, given the dedication of the American Library Association to freedom of speech.

For him to come here and talk to you, and release this information, it's embarrassing to his employer. I mean that is extraordinary. But I think that is an indication of how extraordinary the problem is. You can't understand the frustration when you have a person who's fluent in Arabic who can see and understand threats and people come into his office, order him to conduct searches that he knows are ludicrous and he says, "This can't be a real terrorist threat; it makes no sense." And you are ordered to do it: "I want every person on it and snap to or you're fired," because you're that Youssef guy.

Bassem Youssef: I was thinking this morning, just reflecting a little bit. I'm going back a little bit to 20 some years ago—1986 I was in a way recruited by the bureau as the first FBI agent at a fluency level of four in Arabic of Egyptian background. To be honest with you, up until that day, I never thought in a million years that the FBI—tall blond, blue-eyed agent with a badge would look for someone like me. I was honored, I still am. I love the FBI. So to take it to today, for 2005, when I moved into the Communications Analysis Unit, which is a unit that deals with telephone analysis bureau-wide of all our targets, specifically for counter-terrorism subjects. And of course, our primary target would be Al-Qaeda and all the other terrorist groups. But Al-Qaeda is our number one target. So as I began to immerse myself in the unit, I realized that there were—

Stephen M. Kohn: One second. Just so you understand, Youssef can answer questions. The FBI was quite clear that he can about disciplined as a result of his answers.

Bassem Youssef: The National Security Letters authority prior to 9/11, prior the Patriot Act had to be signed and authorized by someone at FBI headquarters or in Washington, D.C. It was not disseminated to field offices. After the Patriot Act, the NSL was now authorized—until today—by the special agent in charge. Based on the fact that an agent would come to me and say, "We need this because we need to look at this guy's records or this gal's records," I would sign it. Well, you can imagine what sort of abuse would happen as a result of that.

Stephen M. Kohn: If the person signing the National Security Letter has no real basic understanding of operation of terrorism in the Middle East—no expertise, no training, no language, no anything—what gives them the qualification for signing the warrantless searches on thousands of Americans? Instead, they were relying on a very narrow exception, that was exigent circumstances where they need nothing. Nothing. "Phone call: We want it, it's an emergency, give it to us." And this was happening in hundreds and hundreds of cases. Mr. Youssef went to the Office of the General Counsel and said, "What does this mean? I need guidance." Office of General Counsel gave him direction on what exigent circumstances is essentially was if there's a strong need for it. You know, we need it immediately, promptly, an emergency. What we now know is the definition provided by FBI Office of General Counsel to their unit responsible for National Security Letters was a false definition; it was not truthful. because exigent circumstances required life-threatening, imminent terrorist activity. And you can understand if you are a member of Congress you are trying to be reasonable. If the terrorist are boarding the plane, you may have to do something very quickly; it's exigent. But if there's time to attempt to protect due process, you should do it because we do have a U. S. Constitution that does have certain protections for privacy.

Question: In your person opinion, do the majority of agents feel conflicted but powerless, or do they feel these limitations are justified?

Bassem Youssef: The Bureau is operated by great agents who want to do the right thing. However, what could conflict that, even though in their own minds they want to do the right thing, is the policies that come down from the top. Just to give an example, I think the Abu Ghraib situation was well-publicized. We all know about this. Whether we stand one way or another of the actual war in Iraq, I can tell you this: that my background having lived the Middle East for thirteen years and started high school here. So before high school, my entire life I was immersed in Middle Eastern culture. There were things that were absolutely astounding to me as I was hearing by supposed experts or contractors who were telling the prison guards: Soften them up for me. And that could mean a lot of things. However, that was interpreted as, from all the media accounts, to actually strip these men naked, to bring in dogs, and to expose their genitals before the dogs.

The Middle East in general is very very, modest. Modesty is a very big deal. To take an Iraqi who is twenty, thirty years old and have him be stripped naked in front of a female, I assure you what happened in those days is that it shut them down completely. We got no information out of them because they didn't trust or respect their captors and then they went back to their villages when Abu Ghraib was shut down and guess what they were telling their neighbors? "Don't ever talk to these guys." If there is an understanding—and I believe it's a wrong understanding—that somehow national security and civil liberties are at odds with each other, I don't believe that is the case. I believe that they complement each other.