Yet Another Of The FBI's Own Terrorist Plots... Involves A Group Of Senior Citizens
from the grump-old-terrorists dept
The latest Radiolab "shorts" episode, entitled Grumpy Old Terrorists, seems like a bit of a departure in subject matter for that program -- but fits right in with something we've been talking a lot about lately. Over the past few years, we've noticed the rather disturbing trend in how the FBI keeps publicly celebrating stories about stopping terrorist plots -- but in almost every case the details show that it was actually just stopping its own terrorist plots that it feeds to hapless individuals, often nudging them and pushing them down the road to "become" terrorists, despite commonly displaying little to no aptitude for actual terrorism.In the last few weeks, the mainstream press has started to notice this as well, with stories about it appearing in both the NY Times and Rolling Stone. However, the Radiolab episode highlights a similar, but slightly different story, that was actually covered in great detail in an article in Esquire a few months back, entitled Waffle House Terrorists -- which includes the mugshots of the four "terrorists."
On Radiolab, they play the audiotapes the guy made of the plotting -- and there's obviously some crazy stuff being said. But, as they look deeper into the role of the informant, the Radiolab hosts conclude the episode by noting that the whole situation doesn't really make them feel any safer. Yes, these old guys were hateful and helped join in this plan to cause lots of death and destruction. But, so much much of the plot and the participation of these guys really does seem driven by the "informant," who does not seem like the most credible of guys. And it's this exact scenario that we keep seeing over and over again. It may not reach the level of entrapment, and it may put some people really ignorant and crazy people in jail -- but is this really the best use of the FBI's time and efforts? Creating bogus "terrorist" plots involving people who had no real means to actually do anything?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: entrapment, fbi, informant, terrorism
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
FBI entrapment has far more likely odds given that is their mandate almost since inception.
Terrorist act occur less frequently than lightning strikes.
Point here is the FBI looks to subvert people it believes are threats, irregardless of if they actually are.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
FBI entrapment has far more likely odds given that is their mandate almost since inception.
Terrorist act occur less frequently than lightning strikes.
Point here is the FBI looks to subvert people it believes are threats, irregardless of if they actually are.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
For the most part I've accepted this, and I acknowledge and appreciate that if a word has entered common usage it _IS_ a word regardless of its correctness.
That said "irregardless" is one of the few that grates on me every time I hear it. It's totally redundant with "regardless", and adds a negative prefix to it. It's definitely not a word that brings a big value proposition to the English language.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/aps-approval-of-hopefully-symbolizes-l arger-debate-over-language/2012/04/17/gIQAti4zOT_story.html
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There are 16 million lightning storms every year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
FBI:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
All About Intent
Group-1:
No intent to commit terrorists acts - No capability (knowledge & resources).
Just regular folks.
Group-2:
No intent - Has capability
Regular folks with the knowledge and resources needed to carry out a terrorist attack, but no intent to do so.
Group-3:
Has intent - No capability
Wannabee terrorists, but clueless as to how to proceed.
Group-4:
Has intent - Has capability.
Terrorists!
I believe the FBI would be happy to go after Group 4, is not interested in Group 1, uses Group 2 as subject matter experts, and convinces Group 3 that they have acquired capability (when they have not) then pounces on them.
It is the prexisting intent of those in Group 3 that gets them into trouble. The FBI is just making sure they don't become members of Group 4 - good job!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: All About Intent
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: All About Intent
It's a dangerous line to say someone is guilty of something because they would (or _might_) do that thing.
No, we're not too concerned about the FBI arresting people who would've been willing to kill lots of civilians; but we should be wary any time the government uses "terrorism" as a way to encroach on our civil liberties.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: All About Intent
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: All About Intent
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: All About Intent
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: All About Intent
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Sad
So lets say someone comes to you and offers you a job where you can make $1 million , all you have to do is drive someone across the border into Mexico. I bet there are a lot of people that would do it, it would not be illegal in itself but the FBI could very easily set this up and accuse you of assisting in the movement of a terrorist, it makes no difference if you did not know he was a terrorist you would still be guilty. This is the same thing.
The rule of law does not exist in America any more , entrapment is used and anyone saying it is entrapment is told they are uneducated on the laws.
Giving someone the power to do something they would never have had the power to do is the same as giving a kid a gun, someone is going to get hurt.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Witch Hunt
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Terrorists and their Social Security
We have voted to reject any offers presented by the FBI.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
english as a deobfuscation tool
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: english as a deobfuscation tool
/this is "almost" sarcasm, more akin to "sad but true"
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Real Terrorists
Their job is to put people responsible for this behind bars- they're instigating it, they're planning it, they're making the deals Happen- THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE AND GUILTY OF ATTEMPTED GENOCIDE.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
This is essentially the capture and prosecution of thought-crime.
Where's that nearest habitable planet? Time to go...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Jurors can decide whatever they want without regard to the written law. If you think something is wrong (entrapment, drug enforcement, etc) do your best to get on a jury and don't agree with the government's charges.
Make sure everyone you know is registered and understands their rights as a juror.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Minority Report
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Minority Report
...for the FBI anyway. It would be hilarious for the rest of us if it didn't suck so damn much.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes. Their effort to spread fear of terrorism through society so the people will bend over and beg Big Brother to protect them by taking away even more of their freedoms.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
FBI
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
I guess that would depend on the purpose of the FBI's efforts.
If the goal is really to stop terrorism, than I'd say probably not.
If, on the other hand, it is to lay the groundwork to further reduce the civil liberties of our society than it might very well be good use of their time.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
kewl they didnt do it with students as in Bologna 82!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
haplessly hanging out in waffle houses
Once again, not knowing all the details, if any, I comment shortly on the "hapless" individuals involved in this article..
In so much as they didn't kick the byjesus out of this informant from the git go, and became deeply involved with him instead, doesn't that becry fowl and in the very least make them extremely S T U P I D ?? I had to get this in.. sorry if redundant, I didn't read other comments.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment
Add A Reply