Quote: Original post by btower
So I don't understand what made the FBI setup this plot.

They most likely need public wins to justify their budget. They convince some idiot to try to blow something up, so they can catch him.

"Look at us, we stop terrorists!"

Pick up the gun

Quote: Original post by btower

Quote: Original post by MarkS
If the FBI wasn't directing him, it is very much possible that he would have gotten a hold of someone that shared his beliefs and had the resources.

I think you shouldn't say "very much possible" in this case. It's highly unlikely for a 19 year old student to have connections to terrorists 5000 miles across the globe. Even if he knew how to reach a single connection there, why would this connection listen to him? What would the student write? "Hey guys I wanna blow something up for the cause! Send me $$$!"? It's not very easy to get these kinds of connections, and I'm glad it's not easy!

I'm sorry, but how much do you think it actually takes to build a bomb? Anyone who didn't sleep through their high school science classes or has access to the internet can produce dangerous explosives or worse. They are horribly inexpensive and easy to produce.

Biological warfare isn't easy, but basic chemical agents aren't that hard or expensive to produce. (Just dangerous as hell to do in a shack-lab.)

The Oklahoma City bombing was done for just a few thousand, but could have been done far far cheaper for the same effect. Given that the target in this case was a crowd of unprotected people in the open, then a little bit of forethought and design effort could have seen a horrible mass murder done for less than $1000 in materials.

This doesn't sound like they pulled some random kid off the street, handed him a remote, and said "Hey kid, press this button for some lols!". It sounded like they detected a potential threat, investigated it, proved the threat to be real, and then arrested the person.

Quote: Original post by MarkS
Yes? And?

Federal authorities were informed in the early planning stages of both plots and made efforts to stop them. At the point that authorities came onto the scene, there was little to nothing to charge the person(s) with. If authorities had simply done nothing, the people involved would have continued to search for co-conspirators and these two incidents would have turned very ugly.

All the FBI did in these two cases was allow the people involved dig their own graves. They were given multiple opportunities to back out and insisted on carrying on with the plots. I have no sympathy.

It has nothing to do with sympathy. The point I was making was that the FBI builds up an opperation where there was none, and then holds a press conference to announce how they just stopped a terrorist attack(that they set up).
This is not a vast distance from Operation Northwoods.

But it's good to know that you're so fearful of media/law enforcement created boogeymen that you desperately sacrifce as many rights as you can in order to offer yourself the illusion of safety. You sir are a great patriot.

Quote: Original post by MarkS
If authorities had simply done nothing, the people involved would have continued to search for co-conspirators and these two incidents would have turned very ugly.

You can't really believe that. Right? I mean, even it were the case that the people involved continued to search for "co-conspirators," with the FBI already monitoring them, it seems to me that, unless the FBI is completely incompetent, not much could have gone wrong because they would still have been stopped as soon as they actually tried making a bomb. Besides, in that case, the FBI would have a better chance of catching even more terrorists (the "co-conspirators" you insist would have shown up).

It's far more likely that the FBI resorted to entrapment because they wouldn't have found any real evidence of terrorism, not because the "terrorists" would have actually gotten away with something.

So why just assert that the incidents "would have turned very ugly" when that is at best your opinion?

Quote: Original post by MarkS


But it's good to know that you're so fearful of media/law enforcement created boogeymen that you desperately sacrifce as many rights as you can in order to offer yourself the illusion of safety. You sir are a great patriot.

what right was sacrificed in this case?

Quote: Original post by cowsarenotevil

Quote: Original post by MarkS
If authorities had simply done nothing, the people involved would have continued to search for co-conspirators and these two incidents would have turned very ugly.

You can't really believe that. Right? I mean, even it were the case that the people involved continued to search for "co-conspirators," with the FBI already monitoring them, it seems to me that, unless the FBI is completely incompetent, not much could have gone wrong because they would still have been stopped as soon as they actually tried making a bomb. Besides, in that case, the FBI would have a better chance of catching even more terrorists (the "co-conspirators" you insist would have shown up).

It's far more likely that the FBI resorted to entrapment because they wouldn't have found any real evidence of terrorism, not because the "terrorists" would have actually gotten away with something.

So why just assert that the incidents "would have turned very ugly" when that is at best your opinion?

Fear and confusion are weapons that can be used by more than just terrorists. Setting a minor threat up like this has just made every other minor threat like that one fearful of seeking help.

Spending years carefully watching this one threat, who had a low chance of drawing in anything much larger than himself, would have been a highly questionable use of resources. Think of how much outrage there would have been if the suspect had slipped through their surveillance and made contact with people who could have really helped him, or worse, had quietly learned what he needed on his own?

Quote: Original post by ibebrett

Quote: Original post by FlashInThePan


But it's good to know that you're so fearful of media/law enforcement created boogeymen that you desperately sacrifce as many rights as you can in order to offer yourself the illusion of safety. You sir are a great patriot.

what right was sacrificed in this case?

They just announced their amazing feat a few days ago. Obviously enough time hasn't passed for someone to think of what can be forced through as a result.
Nearly every time there's a failed attempt with or without DoHS aid, someone always comes up with something that must be done in the name of safety.
And it always either costs billions of dollars, or results in a creep forward to a police state.

Endorsing a piece of propaganda that's entire purpose is furthering this line of policy would require either total ignorance, or accompanying support of said policy. Given that he's clearly read these articles, I must assume he's well read in related topics and not ignorant about the WoT and it's policy/monetary expenditures.

Quote: Original post by Talroth
Fear and confusion are weapons that can be used by more than just terrorists. Setting a minor threat up like this has just made every other minor threat like that one fearful of seeking help.

Quote: Original post by Talroth
I'm sorry, but how much do you think it actually takes to build a bomb? Anyone who didn't sleep through their high school science classes or has access to the internet can produce dangerous explosives or worse. They are horribly inexpensive and easy to produce.

So we can conclude that other like minded teenagers will now choose not to seek out the help of others, in case they're FBI plants, and they will take the safe, inexpensive and easy option of doing it alone, with much less risk of being caught?

Quote: Original post by Talroth

Quote: Original post by cowsarenotevil

Quote: Original post by MarkS
If authorities had simply done nothing, the people involved would have continued to search for co-conspirators and these two incidents would have turned very ugly.

You can't really believe that. Right? I mean, even it were the case that the people involved continued to search for "co-conspirators," with the FBI already monitoring them, it seems to me that, unless the FBI is completely incompetent, not much could have gone wrong because they would still have been stopped as soon as they actually tried making a bomb. Besides, in that case, the FBI would have a better chance of catching even more terrorists (the "co-conspirators" you insist would have shown up).

It's far more likely that the FBI resorted to entrapment because they wouldn't have found any real evidence of terrorism, not because the "terrorists" would have actually gotten away with something.

So why just assert that the incidents "would have turned very ugly" when that is at best your opinion?

Fear and confusion are weapons that can be used by more than just terrorists. Setting a minor threat up like this has just made every other minor threat like that one fearful of seeking help.

Find someone guilty of thoughtcrime, then set him up as a dangerous nukuler terrist and arrest him - sounds great, except that someone who was only guilty of being pissed off had to take the fall for it. Wanting to commit a crime is not a crime, not even in The Greatest Beacon of Censorship and Blind "Patriotism" in the World.

Quote: Spending years carefully watching this one threat, who had a low chance of drawing in anything much larger than himself, would have been a highly questionable use of resources. Think of how much outrage there would have been if the suspect had slipped through their surveillance and made contact with people who could have really helped him, or worse, had quietly learned what he needed on his own?

I think the problem with the US and civil liberties is that the prevailing opinion seems to be "anything can be sacrificed to prevent terrism, as long as it isn't me."