NY Times: 'FBI Foils Its Own Terrorist Plots' 573
Fluffeh writes "Breaking up terrorist plots is one of the main goals of the FBI these days. If it can't do that, well, it seems making plots up and then valiantly stopping them is okay too — but the NY Times is calling them on it. 'The United States has been narrowly saved from lethal terrorist plots in recent years — or so it has seemed. A would-be suicide bomber was intercepted on his way to the Capitol; a scheme to bomb synagogues and shoot Stinger missiles at military aircraft was developed by men in Newburgh, N.Y.; and a fanciful idea to fly explosive-laden model planes into the Pentagon and the Capitol was hatched in Massachusetts. But all these dramas were facilitated by the F.B.I., whose undercover agents and informers posed as terrorists offering a dummy missile, fake C-4 explosives, a disarmed suicide vest and rudimentary training. Suspects naïvely played their parts until they were arrested.'"
It's not Entrapment. (Score:5, Informative)
It's encouragement.
Very different. For one thing, the movie stars Jessica Alba instead of Catherine Zeta-Jones.
And when you say something... (Score:0, Informative)
They kill you: http://tytruth.com/ -- Call it whatever buzzword you want (the C word), but there is some very dark stuff behind the FBI. And the footage from OKC has yet to be revealed to the public, despite numerous FOIA requests.
Re:Odd... (Score:5, Informative)
Did you read the story? The guy said no like 100 times. They pushed on him for 11 months, paid him $250k and promised him no women or children would be hurt. Hard for me to call that willing. If the catch a predator people offered the perps $50k to come have sex with them, you might have a similar situation.
Re:Odd... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually we do. They did 11 months of pushing and pulling. Then they offered the guy $250k.
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:0, Informative)
Used to?
In case you haven't heard one of Obama's admins was selling guns to drug dealers in Mexico, and then when those U.S. guns turned-up in southern border states, justified passage of anti-gun laws to limit them. It's the new trick of false-flagging a U.S. operation to achieve the desired ends.
I know the right-wing blogosphere decided to concoct their own version of that operation but it wasn't even close to that.
The intent was to determine the paths by which guns were unlawfully traded to Mexico from the US. Something clearly within federal purview. This was focused on a fuller understrdanding of the process because of a complaint about not enough focus on the big fish.
Get your conspiracy theories and put them where they belong.
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:2, Informative)
When Bush was doing it, there was coordination with the Mexican government. When Obama was doing it the guns were used to kill Boarder Patrol agents.
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:4, Informative)
In case you haven't heard one of Obama's admins was selling guns to drug dealers in Mexico, and then when those U.S. guns turned-up in southern border states, justified passage of anti-gun laws to limit them.
What onerous anti-gun laws were you referring to, exactly? The only thing I could turn up was that when a gun dealer sells more than 1 assault rifle in a state bordering Mexico, they have to report it (the NRA's take [nraila.org]). It's not illegal to sell a bunch of AK-47s to somebody, it's just that in 4 states you have to fill out a form that says "Hey, this guy came into my store and bought a bunch of AK-47s".
Yes, there's a tradeoff: Downside of having to explain to an ATF agent why you just bought 35 assault rifles. Upside of "Hey, this guy is crossing the border here, stopping by each of the gun stores within this 300-square-mile area here here and here, and crossing the border again." Additional upside: "Hey, this guy is collecting a lot of AK-47s, and doesn't have any sort of legal use for those guns, and after further investigation seems to have this idea about starting a revolt against the US government. Maybe we should watch him a bit more closely."
Re:The best one... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This has been obvious for a while (Score:3, Informative)
God I love the conspiracy theories. Where's Oliver Stone when you need him?
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:4, Informative)
Might want to go back and look at that stuff. Because it was holder who authorized the selling and NOT tracking of the guns sold.
Bush however did, and didn't let them walk. Figure out the difference yet? A walking gun is one where you don't track it.
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:5, Informative)
FBI and the Constitution (Score:5, Informative)
You seriously haven't heard of that? Assuming you're not a troll:
http://rt.com/news/fbi-terrorists-guide-security-171/ [rt.com]
http://www.constitution.org/abus/terror/constitutional_terrorists.htm [constitution.org]
http://welfarestate.com/pamphlet/ [welfarestate.com]
Terrorists include those who:
-Defend the constitution
-Attempt to police the police (taping the police?)
-Lone individuals
-Non-lone individuals (members of groups)
-Rightists
-Leftists
-Pay in cash
-Attempt to hide passwords
-Nervous
-Take pictures
-Stare
This basically just confirms what has been the philosophy of the FBI for a long time (since its founding), including harassment of MLK and the civil rights movement.
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:1, Informative)
Anyone with a brain is immune to this nonsense.
Anyone with a brain and a passing familiarity with the news knows your post is nonsense. Three weeks ago a notorious Russian arms dealer was convicted in US Federal court. Guess how they got him? If stings are good enough to take down experienced international arms traffickers, and organized crime figures [eagleworldnews.com], public officials [nj.com], embezzlers [post-gazette.com], and others, they are good enough to take down potential terrorists. If you don't think so, please tell us why? And please, please tell us that you really believe that everyone taken down in a sting is no brighter than a hick good 'ole boy complaining about the "gubermint" and that it never works on anyone more sophisticated, and what your "reasoning" is?
Russian arms dealer sentenced to 25 years in prison [chicagotribune.com]
Said to be the inspiration for one of the chief bad guys in Act of Valor [youtube.com]
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:4, Informative)
The real morons are the ones who can't tell the difference between a sting and entrapment.
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:5, Informative)
In 2006.
When Obama was secretly President.
God damn him and his time machine.
Operation Fast and Furious [wikipedia.org] began in 2009. I believe Obama was president sans time machine.
Re:The best one... (Score:4, Informative)
There's a big difference between the scenario you originally presented and what actually occurred. His own family alerted authorities (which you twisted into "more angry at his parents than the US or any 'infidels'"), and he was actively seeking outside help (which you misrepresented as "by all accounts had no prior involvement in anything radical beyond browsing the internet"). When somebody calls you on that it's poor form to complain about how far they went along before they arrested him.
But whatever, your original, mistaken post went to +5, and your followup post went to +3. Good for you and the dumb moderators who modded you up.
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score:4, Informative)
They spent almost a year trying to convince the guy, as well as paying him a quarter of a million dollars? Sure as hell sounds like entrapment to me; of course, when you consider who gets to decide what "entrapment" is the same government the FBI happens to work for, I can see how nothing the feds ever do could be considered entrapment in a legal sense - all they have to do is move the goalposts.
Side note: you said
Just yesterday such a event happened, a group of OWS protesters planned to bomb a bridge
No they didn't - a group of radical anarchists, who happened to have attended an OWS rally at one point, tried to blow up a bridge. FYI, you shouldn't believe everything you read on FreeRepublic and InfoWars.
Personally, I always thought the only thing metrosexual hipsters ever tried to blow up were their girlfriends.