You’re more likely to die from obesity or lightening than from terrorism.
But you know what’s crazier?
The fact that most foiled terrorist attacks are FBI created.
Yep, it’s like a George Orwell novel. A tyrannical government sends out its secret police to help dissidents self-incriminate themselves. Resulting in a frightened populace, and a plethora of would-be dissidents and rebels rounded up.
Reading about the FBI’s “anti-terrorism” activities gave me the feeling of subversive government agents. Infiltrating the populace. Looking for anyone who would take part in anti-government activities if given the right opportunity.
At the very least, it feels sketchy.
Sadly, it gets worse. And there’s a myriad of questions behind it (mostly of the moral nature).
Most Foiled Terrorist Plots Involve FBI “Informants”
“FBI Informant” is a code-word. A code-word for “this terrorist plot was hatched by the FBI.”
Look through the myriad of FBI assisted terrorist plots and you’ll notice one thing is constant. FBI informants and undercover agents are always involved. A Human Rights Watch report made this apparent.
They provide the bombs, the missiles, the weapons, and even help drive the vans.
This isn’t superficial help. In most cases, the FBI is providing most to everything required in the plot.
Think of it like an adult helping a toddler steal their mother’s cookies. By themselves, the toddler is incapable of pulling it off successful. With the adult’s help, they’ll have the parent distracted, the stool to reach the cookies, and the time to do it.
That’s the feeling you get while reading these FBI backed plots.
- An informant tried to use anti-Semitic talk to prod a suspect into plotting a terrorist attack (source)
- An informant offered missiles from China and $250,000 to lead 4 men to plant bombs at 2 synagogues (source)
- An undercover FBI agent helped a would-be terrorist setup a plot to blow up the Federal Reserve Building in Manhattan (source)
- An FBI undercover agent helped a wanna-be martyr plan out an attack on DC metro (source)
The FBI isn’t letting these attacks happen, obviously. They’re just playing the role of Satan. Tempting formally innocent individuals to do illegal activities far above their means.
You can read more of these entrapments via FBI agents and informants by going to Heritage’s 60 Terror plots since 9/11 page. Use your “Find” function in your browser (ctrl + F if you’re using Chrome) and type in “FBI” to see all the plots involving FBI informants and agents.
Ridiculous Plots & Incompetent “Terrorists”
It’s one thing if these plots sound plausible. It’s another thing if the suspects are incompetent and adrift, with absurd plots.
For example, the missile terrorist plot mentioned above? Yeah, that’s nuts. Even the would-be terrorist laughed when the undercover agent mentioned it.
It took 11 months of discussions to eventually get that guy to plant fake bombs. The entire discussion was full of willingness overlapping hesitation and a desire for no women or children to get hurt in the attack.
Another case shows how the FBI tried to lure one Detroit Imam into committing rebellion by setting up an Islamic state in America.
Laughter ensues when you find out that the Imam and his congregation were so poor they couldn’t pay their property taxes for the mosque. He got evicted from his house. He ran a soup kitchen.
He ain’t setting up anything.
That didn’t stop the FBI from offering him money to perform a terrorist attack during the 2006 Super Bowl. The Imam turned the offer down. Saying he didn’t want to injure innocent people for no reason.
Is this Even Legal? (& Other Questions of Morality)
Oh, it’s legal.
These orchestrated terrorist plots stand up in court. Only because the defendant has to prove that they had “no predisposition to commit the crime, even when induced by government agents.”
The Justice Department says that suspects are given warnings about what they’re doing and opportunities to back out.
However, conversations between suspects and federal agents shows that sometimes they’re prodded to continue.
What’s interesting about these undercover operations is how they’ve morphed to fit into the terrorist environment.
Before 9/11, the FBI would rarely present crime opportunities that were outside the realm of activities that the suspect was already involved in. If you wanted to get a weapons seller, you got them to sell weapons to an undercover agent. If you wanted to get a drug seller, you’d get them to sell drugs to an undercover agent.
The same can’t be said for terrorist activities. You can’t hire a terrorist off the streets. There’s no terrorism business. So the FBI is left to ensnaring individuals who would take the opportunity if a real terrorist showed up. They’re targeted for their speech, comments, etc. An informant is then sent in to create a relationship with them.
Some of these targets have already had dealings with real terrorists. Most are loners with no connections, and no resources (other than their mouth).
What’s the point of picking off loners on terrorism charges? A case could be made that these individuals posed a threat to national security. Then again, only with the help of the FBI.
The “threat to national security” doesn’t hold water. They didn’t go out seeking terrorists, the FBI came seeking them.
Let’s not forget the subtle “secret police” method that this strategy reminds us of.
The Federal government is sending out agents to find Americans who would take the opportunity to commit terrorism if provided with it. They’re not finding actual terrorists (you know, the armed and funded ones). They’re creating terrorists, then claiming they stopped a terrorist attack.
They only became a terrorist thanks to the FBI’s prodding.
Entrapment isn’t protecting America. It’s creating threats where there were none.
I’d go so far as to say it’s highlighting political dissidents and taking them out.
Further Injury to the U.S. Obsession Over Terrorism
In the end, this is a blow to the U.S.’s terrorism scare. It’s blow to every politician who claims their programs stop terrorists.
I get it if the NSA stops funded and armed terrorist groups (but they haven’t). I get it if the FBI goes after terrorist cells (but they just make their own attacks to stop).
What I don’t get is why the government thinks random individuals need to be taken out.
If 50% of Federal counterterrorism convictions were informant based cases. And if 30% of those cases had the informant playing an active role in the sting operation. Who exactly is the U.S. stopping?
Are our agencies and tax payer money stopping terrorists? Or, are they stopping individuals who said the wrong thing at the wrong time (thereby indicating to the FBI that they’d make a good target)?
These individuals aren’t real threats. They’re manufactured plots.
Add these manufactured plots to the likelihood of getting killed by a terrorist and you’ve got a sad story for the anti-terrorism industry in America.
Politicians and bureaucrats have to justify their programs and the money they’re spending. A manufactured plot where the suspect “could’ve” been a terrorist if you swapped the FBI for ISIS is better than no terrorist threat, to them.
“See! The program works. We’re taking out dangerous terrorists.”
No, you’re just rounding up select people like some secret-police-esque operation. You’re creating problems to fix.
Typical government style.
What do you think about the FBI’s entrapment policies? Is it moral? Can you say these targets are terrorists when the FBI guided them the whole way through it? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.