Originally Posted by Ph8te
I think the only reason they questioned anything was her past in Afghanistan (or Iraq) That incident seemed to be the one that broke the camels back as far as trust goes. Also while her questions were valid she was a little forceful with them. Really she had no proof other than an informants word that he could be the one that was turned.
Good points, but I wasn't addressing their distrust of Danes, but the fact that none of them was suspicious of Brody's long imprisonment and why Al Qaeda would do that. Whether or not she has proof enough to justify her suspicions, you would think that CIA analysts would be trained to be skeptical and to pry into every story for duplicity.
However, as theob noted, it's nitpicking, and is ultimately just a plot device to make Danes stand out as the main character.