FBI Version of NY/NJ Bombing Story Sounds Very Familiar - WhoWhatWhy

FBI Version of NY/NJ Bombing Story Sounds Very Familiar

FBI, Lone Wolf
Photo credit: Adopted by WhoWhatWhy from background (Jim Larrison / Flickr - CC BY 2.0), wolf statue (William Garrett / Flickr - CC BY 2.0) and J Edgar Hoover building (Cliff / Flickr - CC BY 2.0)
Reading Time: 6 minutes

There are some striking similarities between the recent New York/New Jersey bombings and the Boston Marathon bombing, including the use of pressure cooker bombs. But the similarity that really should be ringing everyone’s alarm bells — yet apparently has not — is the revelation that the FBI had prior connections with both bombing suspects.

A number of contradictions and discrepancies in the FBI’s account of those contacts prompts troubling questions about whether the FBI is coming clean about its interest in Ahmad Khan Rahami.

And just as the Bureau did with the purported Marathon bombing mastermind Tamerlan Tsarnaev (and Orlando mass murderer Omar Matteen — another person with whom the FBI was familiar prior to the act), the FBI is painting a minimalist picture of its prior contacts with Rahami, the accused Manhattan and Jersey shore bomber.

For one, the FBI and Rahami’s father are at odds about what he told investigators about his son’s drift toward extremism — the reason the FBI investigated him to begin with. “Keep an eye on him,” the father says he told investigators. The FBI disputes this.

Another reason for concern is the contradiction between the FBI’s “hands off” approach to investigating Rahami (and Tsarnaev) and the well documented and usually very aggressive tactics used against most people with even the thinnest of terrorist connections.

Blame the Messenger


Rahami’s father, Mohammad Rahami, claims he first alerted the FBI about his son’s radical tendencies after his son assaulted family members. “He warned federal agents explicitly about his son’s interest in terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda and his fascination with jihadist music, poetry and videos,” according to The New York Times.

The FBI denies that Rahami senior told agents who interviewed him anything about “radicalization” or “links to Al Qaeda, the Taliban or their propaganda.” By definition, if he had, then the FBI botched the investigation. Or is something else going on?

Based on what they were told, the FBI says it conducted an “assessment,” the lowest level of investigation also used to check on Tsarnaev, which included an interview with the father, a review of Bureau databases and public records, and checks with other agencies. The FBI claims the assessment did not turn up anything that warranted further inquiry.

“If he had been communicating directly with the terrorist organization and the father said ‘Look here’s the email, here’s the phone call, here’s the communication,’ that would be something different that would allow the FBI to get an investigation,” ex-FBI special agent and counterterror expert Tim Clemente, said on Fox News’s “Fox & Friends.”

The implication is clear: Had Rahami senior given investigative agents more specific information about his son’s activities, the Bureau would have dug deeper. But is it really up to the tipster to provide the FBI with iron-clad proof before they investigate a serious accusation?

Besides, many of the individuals targeted by FBI terrorism investigations and stings had no known connections to terrorist organizations, hence the moniker “lone wolf.”

J. Edgar Hoover building, Omar Mateen, Wasil Farooqui, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, Major Nidal Hasan

J.Edgar Hoover building. Omar Mateen (top left), Wasil Farooqui (top right), Tamerlan Tsarnaev (bottom left), Major Nidal Hasan (bottom right) Photo credit: Adopted by WhoWhatWhy from J Edgar Hoover building (Cliff / Flickr – CC BY 2.0), Omar Mateen (MySpace), and Wasil Farooqui (mugshot), Major Nidal Hasan (Department of Defense / Wikimedia), Tamerlan Tsarnaev (Unknown)

Blame the Russians


This was the official line after the Marathon bombing: If only the Russian intelligence services gave us more information on Tamerlan Tsarnaev, we would have investigated him more. The New York Times explained why:

The Russian government declined to provide the FBI with information about one of the Boston marathon bombing suspects two years before the attack that likely would have prompted more extensive scrutiny of the suspect, according to an inspector general’s review of how US intelligence and law enforcement agencies could have thwarted the bombing.

The “information” withheld by the Russians, according to an anonymous official, was a vague description of an intercepted phone call between Tamerlan and his mother during which they discussed Islamic jihad. But as we pointed out at the time, “the reality is that the Russians had already warned that Tamerlan was an Islamic radical, and it is not clear how this additional information would necessarily have provided anything truly substantive to add to a request for spying authority.”

That is, unless FBI agents already knew, or thought they knew, what Tsarnaev was up to with all the jihadi-talk.

Further complicating the FBI’s version of events, then-FBI director Robert Mueller — in a little noticed exchange at a congressional hearing weeks after the bombing — admitted that Tsarnaev’s name had come up twice in FBI records prior to Russia’s warning. Mueller’s admission renders dubious the claim that it was Russia that brought Tsarnaev to the attention of the FBI.

Unequal before the FBI?


The mainstream press has taken note of the alarming number of “known wolves” carrying out violent acts after having some kind of interaction with the FBI.

Omar Mateen, Wasil Farooqui, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, Major Nidal Hasan — the list goes on.

However, this is typically noted as a curious “coincidence,” which is quickly explained away. The fallback claim for the FBI, and FBI apologists, is that the Bureau’s agents are somehow hamstrung by America’s laws protecting civil liberties and that the system is overwhelmed by the number of terrorist investigations.

But if that were actually the case, then why does the Bureau, in some cases, spend years of man-hours and untold sums of money following around and provoking certain individuals into terrorist plots that, upon closer inspection, were not really much of a threat to anybody until FBI provocateurs got involved?

Take Sami Osmakac. A hapless if disturbed young man suffering from mental illness, whom the FBI “investigated” for years, including using a paid provocateur who ultimately cajoled Osmakac into plotting to bomb a local Irish bar. One of the FBI agents on his case can be heard in a recording leaked to the press calling Osmakac a “retarded fool” who didn’t actually have the capacity to plan the attack.

Then there is Khalifah al-Akili, who was also watched for years — and “worked” for months — by a paid informant who ultimately said of his target: “That dude ain’t going to bust a grape — he ain’t going to throw rice at a wedding, believe me.” But that didn’t stop the FBI from introducing yet another informant and continuing the (probably very expensive and time-consuming) investigation.

Advocacy groups like Human Rights Watch and Project SALAM have painted a picture of an FBI that is engaged in a systematic program of entrapment and trumping up charges against many Muslims who pose no real danger to the US.

Conversely, the FBI’s account of how it handled its investigations of Rahami and Tsarnaev contradicts this well-established track record of using extremely aggressive measures to “investigate” Muslims living in the US.

Why is the FBI applying this aggressive approach in such an unequal and seemingly arbitrary manner? Does the Bureau “go easy” on certain people whom they are using for some unknown purpose?

The Bureau claims to have conducted an “assessment” of Rahami that lasted all of three weeks. Predictably, it didn’t turn up anything. A similarly superficial assessment was conducted on Tsarnaev, who was not even an American citizen. Why the soft touch on these guys? Both of them already had a record showing a propensity for violence.

A line from the “it was Russia’s fault” New York Times article about Tsarnaev’s investigation  illuminates the kind of risky game that agencies like the FBI play with dangerous individuals: “At the time, American law enforcement officials believed that Mr. Tsarnaev posed a far greater threat to Russia.”

It’s not made clear whether the author was quoting or paraphrasing his source, but it’s a telling comment nonetheless. The US has a sordid history of supporting Islamic radicals who fought against Russian interests. (In a rather intriguing “coincidence,” Rahami’s father claims to have fought with the CIA-supported Afghan Mujahedin against the Russians in the 1980s.)

It’s important to remember that the FBI, despite its best efforts to portray itself as America’s premier law enforcement agency, is in fact a domestic spy agency involved in all kinds of domestic espionage and international intrigue.

If an individual brought to the FBI’s attention is somehow working for, or unknowingly recruited to play some “useful dupe” role for the Bureau or another federal agency, it stands to reason he or she would not be categorized as a threat.

Related front page panorama photo credit: Adopted by WhoWhatWhy from wolf (Mark Kent / Flickr – CC BY-SA 2.0) and forrest (Alias 0591 / Flickr – CC BY-NC 2.0)

Where else do you see journalism of this quality and value?

Please help us do more. Make a tax-deductible contribution now.

Our Comment Policy

Keep it civilized, keep it relevant, keep it clear, keep it short. Please do not post links or promotional material. We reserve the right to edit and to delete comments where necessary.


5 responses to “FBI Version of NY/NJ Bombing Story Sounds Very Familiar”

  1. Avatar musings2 says:

    Whatever the FBI involvement, you really ought to see the many tapes of the Boston Marathon “bombing” and to walk the section of Boylston St. where it happened. There is much that does not add up to the massacre described, not the least of which is the tale of the double amputee. But if you swallow that story whole, it does not matter how many connections you find with the FBI and the bombers. You are like almost everyone else in our society trading in the debased coinage of repeated second-hand tales, not subjected to the skepticism you would apply to the purchase of a used car. The public is more interested in blood and thunder (even if both are stage effects) than in uprooting truth – hence the disparaging label “truther” as though facts are too boring to bother about.

  2. Avatar Richard Arlen says:


  3. Avatar Trigon500 says:

    Recall how quickly the TV news dropped its coverage of the Craft intl goons of the Boston marathon?
    These uniformed goons with their packs that precisely matched those that contained the bombs were shown to us early on, then poof! The media was certain of who it was from a couple phone calls from the feds no doubt.

  4. Avatar M. says:

    James, to you point, you ought to check out The Newburgh Sting, a documentary about FBI entrapment of 4 very down and out dupes and the very concerted indirect assistance the Bureau provided them, rather unwillingly, to become terrorists. This is one of those cases where the FBI saved the day just in the nick of time, followed by a randy media blitz full of backslapping, awards, promotions, and raises all around.

    The remarkable thing about the story, and the reason we know all the details about it, is that once these guys were caught their bold lawyers declined to make a plea deal for their clients, so the Bureau had to make their case in court, forcing them to revealed EVERYTHING they’d done to help, inclusive of surveillance footage taken by their informant as he was pushing them to act. (The funniest and most tragic line in it comes from one of the patsy’s who said, “well, I’ll do it if we don’t have to kill anyone.” And still they lost the case.) Once must assume that, as a matter of incentive structure, that this kind of behavior is systemic throughout the institution.

    The film is available on HBO on Demand and HBO Go, I believe. Check it out.

  5. Avatar mary w maxwell says:

    Thanks for the comparisons. I quote here a former FBI agent who was quoted in a Human Rights Watch paper, which is found in Masha Gessen’s book, “The Brothers.”

    The former FBI agent is Michael German. He reportedly said:

    “Today’s terrorism sting operations reflect a significant departure from the past. When the FBI undercover agent or informant is the only purported link to a real terrorist group, supplies the motive, designs the plot and provides all the weapons, one has to question whether they are combatting terrorism or creating it…”

  6. Avatar Hunter.Forrest says:

    Even if you give spies and law enforcement the benefit of the doubt, they are still criminally negligent after they sacrificed our civil liberties ostensibly for their protection.

    It is truly unbelievable that the lone wolf’s own father rats him out as a terrorist, but yet the NSA and other spies would not track EVERYTHING he communicates while in the US, and while traveling numerous times in our war zones – at a higher level of scrutiny than you or I.

    For instance, simple automated analytics would raise human alerts after he favorited jihad videos on his G+ account. Analytics would also automatically alert humans when he purchased I.E.D. components on eBay.

    After 9/11 and Snowden, it is now completely unbelievable to blame “civil liberty protections,” which no longer exist, from keeping the trillion-dollar, privacy-robbing spying systems from automatically tracking this guy’s every move, and his associates’.

    It is clear that at least two Egyptians were involved. Two EgyptAir airline security officers took the duct-tape/wire/cell phone laden cooking device I.E.D. out of his travel bag within minutes of the drop, likely turning it off so that only one guy takes the fall within 48 hours, based on his fingerprints and his own cellphone – the lone wolf.