Would-Be Bomber Arrested In Kansas; Planned Suicide Attack on Ft. Riley

The Associated Press (as carried by the Boston Herald) reports that a 20-year old Topeka man has been arrested as he attempted to arm what he believed to be a thousand-pound bomb outside Ft. Riley, Kansas. John T. Booker Jr. is alleged to have planned an attack in conspiracy with others who were actually FBI agents; Booker's postings to Facebook in March 2014 about his desire to die as a martyr brought him to the FBI's attention, and the FBI sting operation which ended in his arrest began after these posts. Booker had been recruited by the U.S. Army in February of last year, but his enlistment was cancelled shortly thereafter.

Comments

masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

So once again, the FBI entraps someone by convincing them to carry out an attack so that they can stop it and pretend to be heroes. How about actually stopping attacks that you haven't yourself created? Oh, right. That count is still at zero. And I guess you need to justify all your bullshit somehow.

Re:masdf

[BitterOak]

So once again, the FBI entraps someone by convincing them to carry out an attack so that they can stop it and pretend to be heroes. How about actually stopping attacks that you haven't yourself created? Oh, right. That count is still at zero. And I guess you need to justify all your bullshit somehow.

Actually, stings like this may prevent actual attacks from occurring by providing a deterrent. Would you join such a conspiracy if your co-conspirators might be FBI agents? Operations like these send a message out to would-be terrorists: you're not safe planning attacks in this country.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I'm wondering how much of the plan was conceived by the FBI and how much was his own doing.

Re:masdf

[davester666]

You won't believe how many attacks the NSA has stopped, just this week. Of course, it's all classified beyond ultra-super-mega-top-secret, so they can't even talk about it amongst themselves.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

This does *not* make us safer. Quite the opposite, really. They use people like him to promote their own agenda. That is, they want to "prove" that everyone is a terrorist and they need more money and approval to stomp all over our rights, and you shouldn't complain about it.

What happens when one of their sting operations don't go according to plan? Maybe their guy goes a little nuts and decides to do things his own way, ends up killing or hurting a lot of innocent people. The FBI in this case could have stopped it by behaving appropriately instead of pressuring and reassuring him that doing evil was the way to go. Maybe without the FBI egging him on, he wouldn't have done anything.

Here, they found someone that was exhibiting some obvious mental problems. Instead of getting him the help he clearly needed, they decided to make a show out of it for their own propaganda machine.

Re:masdf

[cold fjord]

So once again some anonymous poster that is incompetent in dealing with a set of facts manages to get it wrong. This would-be jihadi made his intent clear, and tried to act on it. Did you not read the story?

FTA

Booker was recruited to join the Army in February 2014, but came to the attention of federal investigators after posting a Facebook message on March 19, 2014, that read: "Getting ready to be killed in jihad is a HUGE adrenaline rush! I am so nervous. NOT because I'm scared to die but I am eager to meet my lord."

A 20-year-old man was arrested Friday while trying to arm what he thought was a 1,000-pound bomb near a Kansas military base as part of a plot to support the Islamic State group, federal prosecutors said.

John T. Booker Jr. is accused of planning a suicide attack at Fort Riley .... Prosecutors allege he told an FBI informant he wanted to kill Americans and engage in violent jihad on behalf of the terrorist group, and said he believed such an attack was justified because the Quran "says to kill your enemies wherever they are," according to a criminal complaint.

"It was alleged that he planned to pull the trigger of the explosives himself so that he would die in the explosion," U.S. Attorney Barry Grissom said Friday morning. "He told an individual that detonating a suicide bomb was his No. 1 aspiration because he couldn't be captured and all the evidence would be destroyed and he would be guaranteed to hit his target."

If you want to try to "blame" that guy's attempted attack on the FBI then you don't understand what is going on. Could you spare us any more of those comments?

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there any evidence at all that entrapment operations like this one protect anything but the atmosphere of fear and the budgets of the involved government 'services'?

Re:masdf

[whoever57]

Did you not notice the stories about how random people have breached security at airports many times over the last few years? If there were any serious terrorists, there would have been attacks at airports. The fact that teenagers were able to get on planes while we haven't had any terrorist attacks shows that the threats are wildly over-stated.

Re:masdf

[ShanghaiBill]

Actually, stings like this may prevent actual attacks from occurring by providing a deterrent.

Alternatively, they may make actual terrorist cells more difficult to penetrate, since they will be less trusting of outsiders. This guy just arrested appears to be another crazy homeless person, who would never have been able to organize any sort of attack without FBI help. It is nice that he will have a warm place to sleep and three meals a day, but is this really a smart way to use FBI resources? If they really have nothing better to do, then perhaps we have too many FBI agents.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps it is you that needs to do some reading.

My posts propose that the FBI gets help for these people instead of propping them up and egging them on. If they cared at all about peoples' safety, that is what they do. But again, they have to go after the big story instead to draw attention to themselves.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like this rock sends a message to any tigers in the neighborhood.

Re:masdf

[cold fjord]

You apparently didn't comprehend the story. That guy was committed to make an attack and die in the process before he came into contact with the FBI. Where is your evidence that the FBI was "pressuring" and "reassuring him"?

Here, they found someone that was exhibiting some obvious mental problems. Instead of getting him the help he clearly needed, they decided to make a show out of it for their own propaganda machine.

What is your evidence that he had mental problems? He certainly had different values, but that isn't the same as being mentally ill. If anything your claim of "obvious mental problems" and that they "decided to make of show out of it for their own propaganda machine" indicates you probably don't understand what was happening. How is it jihadis conduct suicide bombing all over the world (without FBI contact) but you think they can't happen here?

That is, they want to "prove" that everyone is a terrorist and they need more money and approval to stomp all over our rights, and you shouldn't complain about it.

No, they are trying to prove that guy culpable for his actions in a court of law. That has nothing to do with your fatuous claim which is clearly nonsense.

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

you don't know what entrapment means

entrapment is getting you to do something you would not have otherwise done

if the guy expresses his desire to bomb, and proceeds to go through with it, all of his own choice, he's not entrapped

the involvement of the fbi is manipulating all of his material to be harmless, and allowing him to proceed. they are not telling him what to do, he's choosing to do it

they let him go forward so they can see if he is an isolated wackjob or if there are conspirators. it also means they get to stick him with serious charges rather than a slap on the wrist

or would you prefer a guy who fervently desires to bomb people to be out there?

there is no entrapment here. none. zero. you simply do not understand the concept

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, stings like this may prevent actual attacks from occurring by providing a deterrent. Would you join such a conspiracy if your co-conspirators might be FBI agents? Operations like these send a message out to would-be terrorists: you're not safe planning attacks in this country.

Or at the very least, encourage would-be terrorists to remain lone wolves and tell NO ONE what they're planning. Lone wolf attacks are the absolute hardest to catch before they occur because only the would-be terrorist knows what he's planning to do.

Re:masdf

[meerling]

Trust us. It's real, but we can't show you.
Yeah, just like the harem of gorgeous women that wait on me hand and foot. I'd love to show you, but you know how shy they can be, so you'll just have to take my word for it...

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you not notice the stories about how random people have breached security at airports many times over the last few years? If there were any serious terrorists, there would have been attacks at airports. The fact that teenagers were able to get on planes while we haven't had any terrorist attacks shows that the threats are wildly over-stated.

Security is not perfect, but it may still be effective -- after all, you don't hear about all the potentially huge numbers of idiot teenagers who are stopped by security. One would expect that far more teenagers than terrorists try to bypass airport security. This doesn't mean that terrorism is not a threat.

Re:masdf

[Oligonicella]

If they cared at all about peoples' safety, that is what they do.

Bogus assertion. All it does is reflect your rather shallow idea of how to deal with radicals who don't give a whit about offing themselves along with others.

Re:masdf

[cold fjord]

You're making an unsupported claim: "My posts propose that the FBI gets help for these people instead of propping them up and egging them on."

Where is the proof of that? Propping them up? Egging them on? This guy made his intent clear before the FBI ever came into contact with him. Why do you believe that wasn't his actual intent? Why do you believe that he didn't intent to kill people? What is your evidence that he is mentally ill instead of willing to engage in attacks that are consistent with his values and like those that occur around the world on a daily basis? Why do you think that America can't have ordinary ideologically inspired terrorists like other parts of the world?

The FBI cares about people's safety which is why they investigate people that announce their desire to commit violent jihad. That isn't "trying to draw attention to themselves," that is investigating the crimes people announce they intend to commit.

Re:masdf

[sjames]

On the other hand, without the FBI keeping him on track, next week he would talk of his desire to be a lion tamer. The week after, an F1 driver...

The FBI did likely get him to do something he wouldn't have done otherwise. That is, get up off the couch and actually take steps to reach his stated goal.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps it is you that needs to do some reading.

My posts propose that the FBI gets help for these people instead of propping them up and egging them on. If they cared at all about peoples' safety, that is what they do. But again, they have to go after the big story instead to draw attention to themselves.

Why not take it a step farther? Instead of bombing ISIS in Iraq / Syria / Lybia / etc., we should really be getting them some mental help. We could leaflet the area with self-help materials. Maybe even parachute in a team of psychiatrists. Of course, what the situation really demands is a dropship that disgorges a crack team of militant atheists, ready to propagate their fined-tuned memes. ISIS would fold up like a cheap suit.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Shooting innocent black men in the back may prevent actual crime by providing a deterrent. That does not justify the initial act.

Re:masdf

[Darinbob]

Entrapment is unlawful. Just because an agent slaps the label "terrorist" on someone does not nullify the laws that must be followed by law enforcement officers.

Re:masdf

[whoever57]

the involvement of the fbi is manipulating all of his material to be harmless, and allowing him to proceed. they are not telling him what to do, he's choosing to do it

You did not read the story properly. The FBI told him exactly what to do. They provided detailed instructions and "training". The FBI built the "bomb" for him and showed him how to "arm" it.

Re:masdf

[Darinbob]

"Dude, I got this bomb I ordered from in the mail just like you told me to, but then I noticed it was just a fake. Your contact was trying to cheat us. I decided to take the initiative and get a real bomb instead. Hope you guys with the fake beards don't mind. Now where are those drugs you promised me?"

Re:masdf

[Etzos]

And on what grounds are they going to force him to get help? He expressed a desire to make a bomb and detonate it, but anyone could express that desire and not actually act on it. That seems like pretty poor grounds to force someone to get help.

Could they have done it when he attempted to buy the goods to make the bomb? Possibly. But I still think those are pretty shaky grounds.

What if they swapped out the potentiality dangerous elements he buys and then waiting until he actually attempts to go through with what he originally proposed? In that case no one would get hurt because the materials he used are rendered inoperative and now they have an actual case to get him help.

I would also like to point out that the OP never actually said anything about getting him help. Only that the FBI should have stopped the attack (Which they did, at the very least, by rendering the materials useless).

Re:masdf

[weilawei]

Damnit Cold, you need to stop making reasonable points. It's almost like you're losing your edge. For a minute there, I almost mistook you for anyone else.

Re:masdf

[Darinbob]

These agents are like the twenty year old narcs at high school who pretend to be students.

Re:masdf

[Gadget_Guy]

What is your evidence that he had mental problems?

Apparently you didn't comprehend the story either. According the TFA, he was "mentally ill and was acting strangely only days before his arrest, according to a Muslim cleric who said he was counseling him at the request of the FBI.". The cleric went on to say that "the agents told him that Booker suffered from bipolar disorder, characterized by unusual mood swings that can affect functioning."

So he had mental problems according to the FBI and the person that was counselling him.

Re:masdf

[weilawei]

This is, by far, the weirdest thread on Slashdot, ever.

Face it, any thread which has both Cold Fjord and Circletimessquare making insightful points is weird. Are pigs about to fly?

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, that's what you call a "bogus assertion?" So doing something about it before it becomes a problem is stupid, and instead we should let obviously dangerous people walk free and actively encourage them to cause harm?

Sure, buddy. That makes total sense to me.

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

you're saying the guy lacks conviction. even if he did (you don't know he lacks conviction), he's still dangerous

there's plenty of rootless airheads out there who know simple right and wrong and have no desire to hurt people. you can't place this guy in the same category as them

the guy clearly articulates a desire to harm others in a vile way and then proceeds to go about making that possible on his terms over a sustained period of time

therefore, he is a serious danger who should not be in general society. he has more than proved a clear and sustained intent to cause harm

the fbi is merely saturating the market for wannabe terrorists, which is a perfect strategy

this is also how they shut down murder-for-hire plots: they simply answer all ads for hitmen. this is what we WANT the FBI to do

you think that if the FBI didn't saturate the market for murderous morons malicious people wouldn't exist? wouldn't go through with their plans? what a fucking stupid idea. ever hear of timothy mcveigh?

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

because no one knows how to buy fertilizer and gasoline?

did the guy back out, back down?

if i sell you a gun, am i responsible for what you do with the gun?

we WANT the fbi providing harmless alternatives for people who intend mass murder

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

do you have something to say on the topic or are fixated on internet personalities due to a personality disorder?

i don't matter. the topic does

say something about the topic or shut the fuck up

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm doing no such thing. Typical cold fjord.
Read here: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/04/11/0323249/would-be-bomber-arrested-in-kansas-planned-suicide-attack-on-ft-riley# and the OP.

They knew the guy was dangerous. He already committed a crime by making threats like that. Instead of stopping it then and there, they set up a sting operation where his handlers would convince him to carry through with a (fake) attack. The FBI provided proof of this themselves. Colluding with a dangerous nutjob would be "egging him on," and I don't care how much a shill like you wants to cry otherwise.

Never once have I ever said he wasn't dangerous. That was entirely your own assertion, and I don't much appreciate you putting words in my mouth and then hounding me for things I never even alluded to.

What is your evidence that he is mentally ill instead of willing to engage in attacks that are consistent with his values and like those that occur around the world on a daily basis?

This just goes to show how much you like to distort reality. If someone openly stated they want to become a martyr and hurt or kill a lot of people, they are mentally ill, whether they intend to carry it out or not. That's not open to debate.

But hey, lets recap: you're saying you are totally fine with ignoring crazy people and supporting their fake terror attacks (which only benefit the government). It would be too hard to simply put these people in a mental hospital instead of leaving them out on the street and encouraging them to plot against innocent civilians, right?

The worst thing is, when (not if) one of these sing operations go wrong, the FBI is going to pretend they had no involvement in it, and since they are with the government, you'll never be able to prove otherwise.

Re:masdf

[stdarg]

Secretive terrorist cells are just one threat vector. What about the guys who openly want to join ISIS? Or the people who may listen to the openly broadcast messages of ISIS/al Qaeda/al Shabaab/etc saying things like "Rise up and attack shopping malls." There's nothing to penetrate there, it's just a matter of finding people likely to do it.

Somebody who was so radicalized and at the tipping point that they went along with a plot like this is a serious public threat, and not because they might have ended up in a super secret terrorist cell that now we'll never know about.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

If I qualified my statement with, "shooting an innocent white man...", it looks as if only white men should be considered. But since you used black it's ok? Nope. Shooting innocent people in the back, period -- that's what's not ok.

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

for a second time now: i'm not important here. i'm not the topic here. your need to fixate on me tells us about your problems, but it does not tell us about the would be-bomber in kansas

what this place slashdot is is called is a discussion forum. people post a topic, then people discuss the topic. the people posting here want to talk about that. they don't discuss each other, because that's not interesting nor important. it's not a dating site. i'm not your friend. deal with your social fixation problems elsewhere

now, for a second time: do you have something to say about the actual topic, rather than your pathetic need to make things personal?

good luck with your social development

Re:masdf

[sjames]

I'm saying the guy probably lacks executive ability. I'm saying he'd probably still be sitting on his butt dreaming of one day being a suicide bomber if not for the FBI providing the logistics, the plan, and most of the execution.

If the FBI really wants to stop people with the desire AND fortitude to actually be harmful, they shouldn't get involved until they actually take some concrete step. Alas, that's not what they do in these cases. They look for morons who post stupid stuff online and then do 100% of the heavy lifting and then arrest the guy who is essentially a spectator in it all.

McVeigh was clearly not in the same category. He actually took the steps to carry out his plan.

Re:masdf

[weilawei]

i'm not your friend.

I sure as hell hope you're not.

For the record, Slashdot is a discussion forum for entertainment, and people discuss all sorts of things, including the topic at hand, the state of their life, the state of other peoples' lives, the state of other posters' lives, advertisements for GNAA, etc..

I can't help it if you don't know which other posts are mine--and it's not my problem to make you aware of that. Try asking Timothy.

You take this shit way too seriously buddy. Have a chill pill.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

So once again, the FBI entraps someone by convincing them to carry out an attack so that they can stop it and pretend to be heroes. How about actually stopping attacks that you haven't yourself created? Oh, right. That count is still at zero. And I guess you need to justify all your bullshit somehow.

Actually, stings like this may prevent actual attacks from occurring by providing a deterrent. Would you join such a conspiracy if your co-conspirators might be FBI agents? Operations like these send a message out to would-be terrorists: you're not safe planning attacks in this country.

So, fuck the guy that may have never done anything wrong? What about him?

Re:masdf

[weilawei]

if i sell you a gun, am i responsible for what you do with the gun?

If I tell you what to do with said gun first, then yes, I would also be liable. If you tell me you plan to use a gun to commit a crime, I would also be liable if I then sold you a gun. This logic has been applied to all sorts of criminal activity (for example, building secret compartments into cars).

/welp, I've run out of anonymous posts for the day. Good thing the karma burner is fully fueled.

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

is your post about the would be bomber in kansas?

or is it about an inappropriate need to have a personal interaction?

i'm sorry for whatever personal problems you have that drives you to seek personal interaction on fucking slashdot of all places. you obviously need a friend, badly. i don't fucking care about you, so stop interacting with me personally... understand how it works now?

Re:masdf

[weilawei]

i don't fucking care about you, so stop interacting with me personally...

Clearly. That's why you keep replying.

This is like shooting fish in a barrel.

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

mcveigh would have been stinged like this kansas douchebag, and all those people in oklahoma city would not have died

and morons like yourself who don't understand what entrapement is would be complaining about mcveighs weak executive function and that mcveigh was entrapped

as if being a criminal mastermind is a prerequisite to mass murder

Re:masdf

[bkmoore]

You apparently didn't comprehend the story. That guy was committed to make an attack and die in the process before he came into contact with the FBI. Where is your evidence that the FBI was "pressuring" and "reassuring him"?

Quick google, the FBI has charged over 150 suspected 'terrorists' since 9-11 based on evidence from sting operations. Did they really prevent 150 people from committing terrorist acts? The FBI is either very good at catching terrorists before they even plan their attacks, or they are going out and setting people up. The Tsarnaev brothers kind of disprove the first possibility.

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

what is like shooting fish in barrel? you getting a response from me? so there is nothing genuine about your words, your effort? you're just trolling? so, what have you won? what do you think you have proven exactly?

Re:masdf

[cold fjord]

They knew the guy was dangerous. He already committed a crime by making threats like that. Instead of stopping it then and there, they set up a sting operation where his handlers would convince him to carry through with a (fake) attack. The FBI provided proof of this themselves. Colluding with a dangerous nutjob would be "egging him on," and I don't care how much a shill like you wants to cry otherwise.

Yove got a couple of things wrong there. To start with, he had already indicated his intrest in suicide attacks. Why are you claiming that "his handlers would convince him to carry through with a (fake) attack." Are you trying to claim that he didn't mean what he had stated repeatedly about conducting an attack, a suicide attack at that, despite the fact that he attempted to go through with it? Do you have any basis for this?

A sting doesn't constitute "egging him on." He clearly wanted to conduct of his own free will, and you are in denial about that.

Shill? I have little regard for the opinions of nitwits. If you can't engage with facts you would do better to bow out gracefully and keep the insults to yourself.

This just goes to show how much you like to distort reality. If someone openly stated they want to become a martyr and hurt or kill a lot of people, they are mentally ill, whether they intend to carry it out or not. That's not open to debate.

Although it may be possible they are mentally ill, it is also possible that they are sane but have different values from you, that they are part of a different culture. Your' declaration "that's not open to debate" doesn't actually settle the matter no matter how much you wish it to. Do you have any familiarity with foreign or ancient cultures? I would have to assume not. Many cultures have had very different values from what you are accustomed to. That doesn't make them insane. Should we skip over the question of evil?

But hey, lets recap: you're saying you are totally fine with ignoring crazy people and supporting their fake terror attacks (which only benefit the government). It would be too hard to simply put these people in a mental hospital instead of leaving them out on the street and encouraging them to plot against innocent civilians, right?

Do you remember what you just wrote? Allow me to quote you:

That was entirely your own assertion, and I don't much appreciate you putting words in my mouth and then hounding me for things I never even alluded to.

Amazingly you are both pot and kettle in this debate. Should I give you some time to argue it out with yourself to decide which way you want to roll?

The worst thing is, when (not if) one of these sing operations go wrong, the FBI is going to pretend they had no involvement in it, and since they are with the government, you'll never be able to prove otherwise.

I think there is remarkably little chance of the FBI pretending anything like that.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

> Apparently you didn't comprehend the story either.

Dude, its Cold Fjord, he has a mental illness where he only sees the most extremist right-wing version of anything he reads. His visual cortex is physical incapable of processing any words that might even hint at a more sane interpretation.

Re:masdf

[EmeraldBot]

I'm doing no such thing. Typical cold fjord. Read here: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/... and the OP.

They knew the guy was dangerous. He already committed a crime by making threats like that. Instead of stopping it then and there, they set up a sting operation where his handlers would convince him to carry through with a (fake) attack. The FBI provided proof of this themselves. Colluding with a dangerous nutjob would be "egging him on," and I don't care how much a shill like you wants to cry otherwise.

Never once have I ever said he wasn't dangerous. That was entirely your own assertion, and I don't much appreciate you putting words in my mouth and then hounding me for things I never even alluded to.

What is your evidence that he is mentally ill instead of willing to engage in attacks that are consistent with his values and like those that occur around the world on a daily basis?

This just goes to show how much you like to distort reality. If someone openly stated they want to become a martyr and hurt or kill a lot of people, they are mentally ill, whether they intend to carry it out or not. That's not open to debate.

But hey, lets recap: you're saying you are totally fine with ignoring crazy people and supporting their fake terror attacks (which only benefit the government). It would be too hard to simply put these people in a mental hospital instead of leaving them out on the street and encouraging them to plot against innocent civilians, right?

The worst thing is, when (not if) one of these sing operations go wrong, the FBI is going to pretend they had no involvement in it, and since they are with the government, you'll never be able to prove otherwise.

If anyone who would kill themselves to take out what they perceive to be an enemy is mentally insane, does that extend to soldiers in war? I agree with Cold here; whether or not what the FBI did was justified, at least they did their job for once. The best way to get him help might very well be through the prison system, if his lawyer can get him to plead insanity.

However, even if he gets stuck in prison, I can't say I'm against that decision. It's unfortunate, but he is clearly willing to kill innocent bystanders to fulfil some crazy goal. Does that not make him a threat to our general society? And isn't the whole point of the criminal system to protect the public? Either he goes to an asylum or he goes to the prison system; whatever happens, I don't think it's in society's best interest to let him walk on the streets, and the fact that nobody died here should be applauded. If instead we read a news story two weeks from now about this psycho blowing himself up, would you be saying that the FBI failed?

Re:masdf

[weilawei]

Do I even need to say anything? Could I just post a blank reply?

You don't seem inclined to reply to my other comments which actually address the topic (again, not my issue if you don't know which ones those are).

I take it that you have nothing to say about the topic at hand.

Re:masdf

[circletimessquare]

what other comments? if you actually wrote something in another thread on this topic: thank you!

but i don't even fucking look at the username: I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PERSONALITY. i respond to the topic, and in this thread you seem to be desperate for a date. i'm not gay, so fuck off, and i will gladly see you in another thread that actually fucking matters, asshole

but don't expect me to fucking notice or even care about who i am responding to. so don't keep tabs. i don't care about you. really. sorry!

Re:masdf

[weilawei]

but don't expect me to fucking notice or even care about who i am responding to.

I don't expect anything from you, except for you to keep tugging that line. You're so worked up, and in so many places all over this thread, you can't even make reasonable arguments anymore without swearing up a storm or calling people stupid.

Seems like this is going pretty smoothly.

Re:masdf

[sonicmerlin]

He's not a soldier in war.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Entrapment is so narrowly defined in modern US law that it's almost meaningless. Undercover officers can threaten people with physical violence or outright murder to coerce them into committing a crime and the conviction for that crime will still hold up in court as long as the court can be convinced that the perpetrator/victim had some inclination to commit the crime anyway.

Re:masdf

[itzly]

The FBI is either very good at catching terrorists before they even plan their attacks, or they are going out and setting people up. The Tsarnaev brothers kind of disprove the first possibility.

More likely, it's a combination of both. Some of the people they caught would probably have succeeded without the FBI, others needed FBI help, and some needed FBI encouragement. Of course, the FBI can't reliably see what kind of person they're dealing with when they start the sting, and how this person may develop later.

Re:masdf

[sjames]

Note how McVeigh was NOT stopped at all.

Since you were apparently raised by wolves:

*PLONK*

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. The Republicans had their thugs in blue arrest this guy for being black. They hate us and want us to die.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

>you're not safe planning attacks in this country.
I'd prefer not to have a false sense of security, thank you.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

A sting doesn't constitute "egging him on." He clearly wanted to conduct of his own free will, and you are in denial about that.

According to the FBI informant on the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed 6 people and injured 1000 more, the FBI was basically letting the plotters on that run with their plan with the intention of providing fake explosives and swooping in at the end. According to him, it got away from them, and the plot ended up being carried out with real explosives. Some believe that's the case, others don't. The FBI M.O. fits and some of the evidence seems legit enough that it seems like there's a good chance that it may be true. In any case, it provides a good example of exactly why it isn't a good idea to groom dangerous people with dangerous ideologies. It happens all the time with organized crime as well... the FBI or other agencies will allow, and sometimes encourage or even direct and plan, all kinds of criminal activity without lifting a finger to stop it with the plan being to wait for the chance to bring down a really big fish. Consider Whitey Bulger, for example.

Re:masdf

[cold fjord]

Apparently you didn't comprehend the story either. According the TFA ...

I am amused to inform you that you aren't quoting from TFA. If you follow the link in the story summary it brings you to a story that doesn't contain the paragraph you quote, or even a number of the key words. You are quoting from a different story at the same source. Since you didn't provide a link, allow me:

Man charged with plotting bombing at Kansas military base

So, it turns out that I comprehended the story, and you didn't. What you did do was bring in new facts in a different story from a reputable source, and helpful ones for the discussion.

So yes, it appears he may be mentally ill. That doesn't make him less dangerous.

Imam Omar Hazim of the Islamic Center of Topeka told The Associated Press that two FBI agents brought Booker to him early in 2014 for counseling, hoping to turn the young man away from radical beliefs. Hazim said the agents told him that Booker suffered from bipolar disorder, characterized by unusual mood swings that can affect functioning.

Hazim said he expressed concerns to the FBI about allowing him to move freely in the community after their first encounter.

If he is in fact mentally ill that potentially raises new difficultes involved with involuntary commitment or possible criminal defenses. In either case the state's position is much stronger since he attempted an attack rather than simply writing about it. There isn't much room for doubt that he is a danger to himself (suicide bomber) and the community.

But there is more to it than that. It appears that there are more people involved in this plot. I doubt they will all be mentally ill. What will you have to say if it turns out to be 2 sane guys with different values and 1 mentally ill guy with different values? Even if this one individual is mentally ill, that doesn't necessarily mean that this plot wouldn't have been of interest to him if he wasn't.

Re:masdf

[robi5]

>If someone openly stated they want to become a martyr and hurt or kill a lot of people, they are mentally ill, whether they intend to carry it out or not. That's not open to debate.

No, you're only proving that you're incapable of properly reasoning in the real World. You hold some values and convictions and your spotty thought processes lead you to assume that all other people do, even those that grew up in radically different environments, maybe in a setting resembling the medieval ages, or maybe born to parents who themselves grew up in such an environment, and now they, and their children have difficulty adjusting to the First World. You are apparently incapable to understand that there are lots of religions and lots of calls to arm, especially in the Muslim world. Therefore you don't model a jihadist properly; you model yourself, or those who grew up near you, with the slight superficial change of having darker skin, calling God in a different name and maybe speaking an additional language.

Because naive (I was polite here) people like you represent danger to society through improperly resisting defense mechanisms of society, maybe society would benefit more from your visits to a psychologist than from the visits of a jihadist in the making:

You might learn not to project your current mind into the bodies of other people. You might learn that someone plotting something unreasonable _to you_ may not be mentally ill. However the jihadist won't say, "Yes, sure, after these 10 therapy sessions now I see the World is a beautiful place and I want to constructively contribute to society.".

Re:masdf

[sound vision]

Maybe the terrorists aren't as fixated on planes as the westerners are after 9/11? I've noticed that when you add "...on a plane" or "...at an airport" to things that people otherwise wouldn't care about, suddenly it's a huge issue. While there are certainly special considerations that need to be made for safety in the context of air travel, there's many easier ways for terrorists to make a statement and kill a bunch of people. Fill a U-Haul with a couple tons of explosive. Fill smaller containers with explosive and distribute them around a city. Walk into a crowd and open fire. Let out poisonous gas in a subway or other enclosed space. Car bombs in particular happen on an almost monthly basis in the middle east, and there have been quite a few high-profile terrorist attacks in the west since 9/11, none of them have involved planes. Boston bombing, Madrid bombing, London bombing, Charlie Hebdo, Ft. Hood. Terrorists aren't looking at planes.

Re:masdf

[sound vision]

Do you have a source for that? Certainly there are narcs, but I've never heard of any of them enrolling in high schools undercover. Cops threatening high school kids who got caught anyway to cough up some names, sure. But when they invest an undercover agent (= lots of money), it's going to be for a big investigation, not to find out which high school kid sold a dimebag to which other high school kid.

Re:masdf

[robi5]

Lion tamer? Sounds like a realistic next goal for someone like this ticking bomb guy. Once someone clearly identifies with the goal of killing hundreds of people, it's more economical to test his intentions (which they did) and carve the rotten flesh out of society's body, versus resorting to asking him "enjoy the World, how do you feel about your mother, and hey here are some pills, if all fails, they'll change your mind - because you want this, right? - , pretty please never ever skip them" or following his every move for the rest of his life at a huge expense to society, which is never an airtight process anyway. We can moralise a lot from the vantage point of First World sophistication, but someone infected by medieval concepts will only exploit this as cracks in the society's self defense mechanism. If they go medieval on us, we need to take appropriate action, in pragmatic ways, to defend ourselves, rather than being immersed in navel gazing, rationalising murderous behavior etc. If he was ready to set off the bomb, of course let's remove him from society. I think most vegetarians would resort to eating meet if the alternative is starvation; most animal lovers don't have a problem squishing the odd moskito or wasp if they are bitten. The humanistic person like you also need to deal with forces whose very intention is to end humanistic society. Sure, learn about stuff, analyse, rationalise, give planet size benefits of the doubt, and contemplate how we should acquit criminals if it was proven they had a bad hair day or somebody looked at them with contempt. But in the meantime defend yourself from clearly demonstrated dangers, otherwise you might find yourself under Sharia law and you can forget about open discourse.

The FBI presented the guy with an 'opportunity' the same way some jihadist cell could have done, having identified him as a willing contributor. What's the difference? What if he were approached by a real terrorist cell, did the same thing, and, e.g. for some technical reason, the bomb didn't go off?

I insist that the FBI take such preventive measures, rather than just resorting to mopping up the blood, identifying bodies, and learning what happened and why, after the event - which are pretty clear to begin with, e.g. they were jihadists, or lone wolf criminals, period.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

the making of the bomb is illegal, but before he has detonated it, would it not be a thoughtcrime? 1984....

Re:masdf

[robi5]

this.

With, as the GP calls them, 'spectators' like these, we don't need enemies.

Re:masdf

[robi5]

This kind of trolling is pretty disgusting, but comes with freedom of speech, I guess.

Re: masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Lone wolves kill less people. Eg: 9/11 versus Boston

Re:masdf

[gl4ss]

unless you know the idea for the attack came from you and not from the feds....

this is predatory, looking for vulnerable people and then exploiting them. they should have sent him to the doctors long before they gave him what he thought was a 1000 pound bomb. like, they could have saved a hell of a lot of money and effort just nailing him for planning a terrorist attack(of course, I guess he could have then argued it was the feds who did all the planning, as they did).

Re: masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it does.

Don't run. Don't die.

Re:masdf

[TsuruchiBrian]

If the FBI arrests 0 people, they are doing a bad job.

If the FBI arrests 150 people, they are doing a bad job.

How many people should the FBI have arrested to be doing a good job?

Re:masdf

[TsuruchiBrian]

Anonymous cowards post lots of things...

Re:masdf

[TsuruchiBrian]

The prison system already has more mentally ill people than the healthcare facilities. In fact, a lot of people refer to the prison system as the nations largest system of mental heath facilities.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference being that Christian faith proscribes terrorism while Muslim faith prescribes terrorism. Their truth or falsity is irrelevant to the above statement.

Re:masdf

[gl4ss]

entrapment is perfectly lawful.

or maybe it's not lawful, but it still goes on through the courts and the entrapped person gets jailtime and the feds walk free.

kinda like many other things aren't lawful, but still go through. unlawful surveillance and what have you.

and the people who do go to court rarely get sentenced for whatever crime they get slapped with first, thank's to the fucked up plea-bargain system you have that quite often modifies the crimes to be totally other crimes than what the action taken by the perp was!

Re:masdf

[amiga3D]

They've been doing this same stuff for decades. Before the Islamic nutcases it was other groups like the so called home grown "militia" groups. They infiltrated one local group of idiots here that just got together to shoot guns, drink beer and bitch about the government. Impatient with the fact that the pussies weren't ever going to do shit they got their inside guy to show them how to make a bomb, then he helped them get the stuff to make one and then after that he helped them make it. Since they were too big a bunch of pussies (or just not really that crazy) to use the thing they only got to prosecute for "conspiracy." I didn't feel much pity for them as they were a sad group of morons but what a waste of money.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Turning a set of two from a false dichotomy into an infinite set doesn't make it any less a logical fallacy. It's not the number of arrests that is important, but how they are carried out.

Re:masdf

[Hognoxious]

By the powers vested in me by my Atlanta GED I proclaim ... 75!

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

21 Jump Street (TV, not film)

Re:masdf

[gtall]

I see. So a Muslim cleric is now a trained psychiatrist who can spot an Islamic nutjob from a regular Muslim...by what, precisely? Wanting to do something the cleric wouldn't entertain himself?

Re:masdf

[gtall]

Hmm...okay, let's remove all security with respect to airplanes. Care to fly now?

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, stings like this may prevent actual attacks from occurring by providing a deterrent. Would you join such a conspiracy if your co-conspirators might be FBI agents? Operations like these send a message out to would-be terrorists: you're not safe planning attacks in this country.

Yes. a person join such a conspiracy created by the FBI and prior to the event kill their co-conspirators to eliminate that threat vector while planning to change the target without their knowledge or merely delay the planned attack by a few weeks until the heightened security level drops to normal status. These government concocted conspiracies are the problem not a solution.

Re: masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Who's the Christian you start out mentioning? Not the suspect in this case, as the article makes clear.

Re:masdf

[fnj]

If someone openly stated they want to become a martyr and hurt or kill a lot of people, they are mentally ill, whether they intend to carry it out or not.

Your intellectual slip is showing. If someone disagrees with your values, that does not ipso facto make them "mentally ill". Rage and hate and evil actions resulting therefrom exist in the world separately from psychiatric disorders. Deal with it. Not every murderer is due a get out of jail free card just because you can't imagine evil without an accompanying psychiatric disorder.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, "Cold Fjord" is an NSA team whose mission is to promote the advancement of federal agencies and criminalization of the American populus as necessary to preserve the American way of life.

Re:masdf

[RabidReindeer]

Trust us. It's real, but we can't show you.
Yeah, just like the harem of gorgeous women that wait on me hand and foot. I'd love to show you, but you know how shy they can be, so you'll just have to take my word for it...

You have 72 virgins???

Re:masdf

[mellon]

17.3.

Dumb question. The job of the FBI is to arrest people who commit crimes. They should arrest exactly those people, and no other people. Of course it's an imperfect science, and they will miss some criminals and arrest some innocent people. But a key demographic they should avoid is arresting people who wouldn't have committed crimes without their help, because it is explicitly not their job to instigate criminal activity.

Re:masdf

[mellon]

Terrorists are interested in instigating terror. If they were as big a danger as they are said to be, they would already have let off a bomb in an airport security line and killed a hundred people waiting to be screened. The fact that this hasn't happened either means that the government has a machine that watches our every move and knows who is going to set off bombs, in which case they don't need these stings, or else it means that there really aren't that many people who are interested in committing mass murder who are able to get into the United States and act on that wish.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

The undercover operation, titled "Operation Glass House," spanned a few months and included undercover officers in three area high schools: Chaparral, Temecula Valley, and Rancho Vista Continuation. The officers posed as regular high school students and would ask other students for drugs. Twenty-two students were arrested - the majority of them are reported to be special needs students like the Snodgrass' son..........His new friend, who went under the name of Daniel Briggs, was known as "Deputy Dan" to many students because it was so apparent to them that he was an undercover officer. However, to their son, whose disabilities make it hard for him to gauge social cues, Dan was his only real friend.

http://reason.com/reasontv/2013/10/09/riverside-cop-tricks-autistic-teen-into

Re:masdf

[TheCarp]

Oh well if it MAY do something desirable through a mechanism you can imagine in the simple fantasies of your head, then by all means lets toss millions of dollars at it, surely its not only easier than finding people with the actual interest and means and a plan, lets continue just making our own and arresting them for show.

This totally justifies the invasion of our privacy so wide scale that they will drop criminal charges against people rather than admit their capabilities in court.

Look its totally working guys, all that surveillance and invasion into our privacy and they are really starting to catch the guys they create and setup for show.

Re:masdf

[Pseudonym]

That doesn't make him less dangerous.

What makes him dangerous is filling his head with dangerous thoughts. The vast majority, if not all, of the people whom the FBI have entrapped in the past are some of the more vulnerable members of society: people without a strong social support structure, part of a marginalised community, often poor, often unemployed, and so on.

It's a fundamental axiom of modern policing that the best way to stop crime is to stop people from becoming criminals in the first place. If someone is at risk of becoming a criminal, the best thing you can do is divert them away from that as early as possible. For the FBI to turn a non-criminal into a criminal is not just a failure, it's sociopathic.

Re:masdf

[Pseudonym]

Clergy of all kinds often have qualifications in psychology or counselling, because that's part of the job description. This is just a guess, but I'd say that while "nutjob" isn't a diagnosis, the mechanism by which said nutjobs are spotted is "science".

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

That's actually not likely at all, since the ONLY ones they stopped were the sting operations, which, again, are things that almost certainly never would have happened without their encouragement.

People really need to understand just how evil the people in our government are. They want to think of them as good people, but they aren't. They have been corrupted by an evil system. For case studies of how this works, read "The Lucifer Effect" or the wiki on the Stanford Prison Experiment. There good men played the role of prison guards and instantly changed into sadistic assholes. Here people are playing the role of anti-terror agents, and have also turned into assholes as a result.

Re:masdf

[Zero__Kelvin]

"Hmm...okay, let's remove all security with respect to airplanes. Care to fly now?"

Or we could go back to the pre-TSA scenario, which was by no stretch of the imagination "no security", but nice attempt at trying to re-frame the conversation to make it sound like anyone who is anti-TSA is a zealot who wants to allow submachine guns in the Airport lobby.

Re:masdf

[tompaulco]

Christianity doesn't "lead to" terrorism any more than Islam "Leads to" terrorism. Neither religion condones or supports terrorism. People support terrorism. People lie and manipulate to support terrorism. People falsely use religion to support terrorism. Don't blame religion. Religion isn't even a physical thing capable of thinking for itself. Blame people.

Re:masdf

[Livius]

Actually, stings like this may prevent actual attacks from occurring

Or, they show terrorists how easy it is to tie up counter-terrorism resources while the serious terrorists go unnoticed. Kind of a reverse SWATting.

Re:masdf

[Mr D from 63]

The vast majority, if not all, of the people whom the FBI have entrapped in the past are some of the more vulnerable members of society: people without a strong social support structure, part of a marginalised community, often poor, often unemployed, and so on.

Unfortunately, these are the same people that are easily exploited and swayed into terrorist acts. If there were some easy way to get to them first, I'm sure we'd all agree that would be wonderful.. but back in the real world there is not always such a luxury. Criminal/Terror acts are treated as such in the eyes of the law regardless of the state of the person performing them, it can be sorted out in the legal process if mental illness was a factor.

The FBI is not just targeting this one person, but also trying to determine if there is an organized support network.

Re:masdf

[Mr D from 63]

You are right, don't blame religion. But also don't overlook the fact that a known religious structure is a key element in the widespread recruiting and development of terrorists. Be it an end or a means depends on where you stand in that structure. But if you don't talk about that structure and call it what it is, you can not hope to dismantle it.

Re:masdf

[Livius]

let's remove all security with respect to airplanes. Care to fly now?

Yes. Since it's reduced my airfare, and massively reduced inconvenience, personal indignity, and time wasted at airports, and only marginally compromised air travel security.

Re:masdf

[Livius]

slaps the label "terrorist" on someone does not nullify the laws

You have not been paying attention the last 14 years.

Re:masdf

[Mr D from 63]

Quick google, the FBI has charged over 150 suspected 'terrorists' since 9-11 based on evidence from sting operations. Did they really prevent 150 people from committing terrorist acts? The FBI is either very good at catching terrorists before they even plan their attacks, or they are going out and setting people up. The Tsarnaev brothers kind of disprove the first possibility.

So, you believe the FBI is only effective if it catches 100% of terrorists? Its convenient to ask to prove the negative "did they really prevent 150 from commuting terror acts". Well of course not all 150 would have, but planning a terror act is a crime in itself. If they prevented one innocent person from dying, its a job well done.

Re:masdf

[ScentCone]

What makes him dangerous is filling his head with dangerous thoughts.

No. You are exposed to the same "dangerous thoughts" as every self-radicalized would-be jihaddi killer. The difference? Their message of medieval theocratic dominance and death-to-the-infidels is repugnant to you, but appeals strongly to them. This is a world view issue. If embracing that twisted vision for the future of humanity is your definition of mental illness, then what you're saying is that untold millions of Muslims are mentally ill.

We could have a separate discussion about religiosity in general, and what it means to go through life clinging to a plainly irrational system of magical thinking. But not all contemporary religious people let their magical thinking instruct them to put the infidels to sword (or car bomb, as the case may be).

Re:masdf

[Livius]

I though his observation was the most interesting and insightful one so far.

Possibly the only interesting and insightful one, and certainly the only one where the poster is informed about the subject matter he comments on.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just a guess, but I'd say that while "nutjob" isn't a diagnosis, the mechanism by which said nutjobs are spotted is "science".

The sad thing, is that it really isn't.

Not just when it comes to actual diagnosis, but treatment.

But I'm not excusing the FBI here, I do think this person needed help. I just don't want to pretend it's a very robust scientific process.

Re:masdf

[CrimsonAvenger]

Trust us. It's real, but we can't show you. Yeah, just like the harem of gorgeous women that wait on me hand and foot. I'd love to show you, but you know how shy they can be, so you'll just have to take my word for it...

You have 72 virgins???

Not anymore....

Re: masdf

[jd2112]

Sounds like a lot of Fox News viewers I know.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

"of all the people whom the FBI have entrapped" - yeah, however few that may be. Certainly since the word "entrapment" became popular many have tried using it in their defense. But that's a trivially small percentage of the cases they actually investigate. I bet even Jesse Jackson Jr. used that word a few times.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Conspiracy (to commit murder, mass murder, terrorism) is a crime. Agreed on your key demographics comment. But in answer to you and bkmoore, all these guys were charged with conspiracy.

Re:masdf

[Lehk228]

not just socially/economicall vulnerable, they do this to mentally ill and retarded people.

it's all kinds of fucked up

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

It's even worse than that. They identified someone with a mental illness, and instead of getting him treatment, they took advantage of him to set themselves up and look like heros. I'm not saying they should have forcibly committed him against his will. But maybe instead of saying, "Hey, buddy, you want to be a martyr? I know where you can get some explosives." they could have said, "Hey, buddy, you don't need to throw your life away like that. Here's a toll-free number you can call if you want to talk about things."

I have been increasingly noticing the juxtaposition between stories in which the US is trying to arrest everyone for every little thing, versus stories about various Nordic countries who have spent the last few decades re-designing their penal system to focus on rehabilitation and treatment instead of incarceration and punishment. In one case, crime rates are soaring. In the other, they're reaching all-time lows.

I'm not a USian. I live in Canada. Our current government is a US wanna-be, and I'm getting sick of it.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently many mentally challenged or mentally ill do join such "conspiracies" or entrapment.
This is the main form of FBI terrorism cases.

Re:masdf

[Pseudonym]

It's not even the number of arrests that's the issue, but the number of crimes prevented.

Better to prevent a crime by steering a vulnerable person away from a life of crime in the first place than to arrest them for a crime you set up.

Re:masdf

[Pseudonym]

Unfortunately, these are the same people that are easily exploited and swayed into terrorist acts.

If they're that malleable, then they should be able to be steered into being a productive member of society instead of being a criminal. The FBI had a choice about which they could do. They chose the one which would give them a headline and a story on Slashdot.

Re: masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Fort Hood != terrorism, per the current administration.

Re:masdf

[caseih]

Bombing is going so well for us isn't it. And the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan with guns and bombs and prisons and such worked amazingly well. Just like these FBI stings work so well. Sure ISIS is slowly crumbling under the constant assault, and will likely be defeated soon. But when it's over the people who are left will be in more need than ever before, and even more vulnerable. ISIS2 will be even worse. In short it's just not working for anyone involved.

Look, at some point we will have to engage on an ideological level. We must find out why so many people are susceptible to fanatical messages and figure out how to convince them that the moderate way is better for everyone. If everyone did have adequate access to mental health care (to say nothing of basic health care, food, and jobs), then yes, ISIS would have had no power to begin with. Comparatively the US doesn't have the problems with certain populations and extremism that other nations in the middle east have, because of the fact that basic needs are usually met.

Perhaps western ideology has little to offer these people. If so then both they and we are in serious trouble.

Re:masdf

[meta-monkey]

FBI entraps someone

Oh, so they forced him to do it? They put a gun to his head and said "go set off this bomb or we'll shoot you?" They took his family hostage and said "we'll kill them if you don't do this?" Is that what happened? Because that's entrapment. Entrapment is the coercion of your free will to commit a crime.

Oh wait that's not anything at all like what happened here. He wanted to do this, posted about wanting to do it, did it of his own free will. This is not entrapment.

Re:masdf

[meta-monkey]

Yes, McVeigh was not stopped because the FBI was not employing techniques like this back then. If they had been, when McVeigh was looking around for militia buddies to blow stuff up with, the FBI would have found him, slipped him a fake bomb, and arrested him.

Except for the possibility of mental illness, I don't see the problem here. No one's being arrested for speech. He had to actually go through with the plan, and be right there pressing the trigger on the bomb to be arrested. So there's none of this "I wouldn't really do it..." No, he really would. And there's no entrapment because he was not forced into the actions. No one put a gun to his head. No one threatened him.

When someone posts on a public forum about how they want to blow up innocent people and die as a martyr for Jihad, what exactly do you think the FBI should do?

Re:masdf

[currently_awake]

We shold drag out the ISSIS fight as long as possible, to kill as many of the muslim extremists (terrorists) as possible instead of having them scatter and stir up trouble in other places. Of course this only works if we don't care about the safety and welfare of the people who live there, but the evidence suggests we don't.

Re:masdf

[Smauler]

cold fjord : What is your evidence that he had mental problems? He certainly had different values, but that isn't the same as being mentally ill. If anything your claim of "obvious mental problems" and that they "decided to make of show out of it for their own propaganda machine" indicates you probably don't understand what was happening.

cold fjord : So yes, it appears he may be mentally ill.

Stop trying to dispute facts that people state that disagree with your worldview without having even done very simple research, please. Please, just stop.

Re:masdf

[v1]

The job of the FBI is to arrest people who commit crimes.

That's like saying my mechanic's job is to change spark plugs.

The FBI's main goal is to protect and defend the United States, to uphold and enforce the criminal laws of the United States, and to provide leadership and criminal justice services to federal, state, municipal, and international agencies and partners.

Currently, the FBI's top investigative priorities are:

Protect the United States from terrorist attacks (see counter-terrorism);
Protect the United States against foreign intelligence operations and espionage (see counterintelligence);
Protect the United States against cyber-based attacks and high-technology crimes (see cyberwarfare);
Combat public corruption at all levels;
Protect civil rights;
Combat transnational/national criminal organizations and enterprises (see organized crime);
Combat major white-collar crime;
Combat significant violent crime.

Assuming they list that in the traditional "in order of importance", then their main job is to "protect and defend the United States". It gets a little more specific below that, but nowhere does it even mention "arrest". The FBI's goals are much more general, they talk about "what we are going to do", not "how we are going to do it".

Law enforcement is a complex business and occurs at many levels. Education, intervention, protection, deterrant, punishment, rehabilitation, enforcement, investigation, infiltration, just to name a few. Steps that prevent crime at earlier stages (education, deterrant, intervention) usually have a bigger effect on criminal activity. Assuming you just want them operating in the USA, and the terrorists are getting their training abroad, your work starts as soon as the radical lands back in the states. The problem there is although they are plotting against the USA, they're still protected by its laws. So you either have to catch them plotting, or catch them doing damage. Obviously it's better to catch them while plotting, especially when they are suicide bombers that obviously don't concern themselves with getting caught after the act.

entrapment:
"Hey buddy, you look like someone that wants to kill people for jihad, would you like to drive my truck bomb?"

NOT entrapment:
"Hello there I'm looking to kill people for jihad, can you set me up with something?" "What did you have in mind?" "A truck bomb would be great, can you set me up with one of those?"

It can get blurry sometimes, but they follow specific rules set up around court cases that decided what was and what was not entrapment. "In criminal law, entrapment is a practice whereby a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit." In a nutshell, if they suggest you break a law, it's entrapment. If you ask them to help you break the law, it's a sting. This wingnut asked for a truckbomb. He obviously was going to try to get one, one way or another, without the FBI's help. So it's not entrapment. He asked them for a rope to hang himself with, and they gave it to him.

And in this case, yes, he got arrested. Most of the FBI's enforcement work ends in arrest, but that only accounts for a small percentage of their total activity. But when they identify someone that's determined to do something dangerous (or substantially illegal), they're more than happy to play the role of an assistant so they can (A) have inside access for gathering evidence, and (B) prevent the attack.

People that are complaining that the FBI ought to find a different way to deal with wingnuts like this need to understand something. You can (A) prevent them from becoming a threat, (B) prevent them from acting, or (C) deal with them after they've acted. These radicals tend to get their training abroad, so (A) is out. I doubt you'd find them walking around with a basket picking up the pieces to arrest, so (C) is out too. So that leaves just (B), which is exactly what they're doing. "If you have a better idea, lets hear it, otherwise quit complaining".

Re:masdf

[Mr D from 63]

Everyone is malleable to some extent. Do you have a test to tell just how malleable enough a person is to get different treatment? It all sounds so wonderful until you try to implement such policy while still trying to stop as many bad guys as possible with as many tools as possible, including the deterrence just knowing there are agents that will play along to get you.

Re:masdf

[TWX]

It's actually the number of people arrested for committing crimes.

The troubling thing in cases like this is that even if the individual arrested wanted to commit a crime of this nature, he probably would not have been able to do so without help, and the only help he found was from the FBI. We don't know what he would have done had he not found that help. Would he have continued to fantasize and plan until he died of old age or until he eventually found that help, or would his mind eventually have changed and other, more pressing needs steered him away from this course?

I don't doubt that just about everyone, at some point in their lives, feels enough anger or depression to want to hurt a whole lot of people. Most of us, even those of us with a truly legitimate reason to be that angry, get over the feelings of wanting retribution. Has the FBI managed to uncover a 'plot' like this where there were more than two people involved that weren't FBI agents in it? So far in every case of this that I've read about, there was one or two people only, and the FBI provided just about everything and was involved in the 'planning'. We need to ask ourselves, are we catching criminals, or are we creating criminals of people that wouldn't have actually offended had they not been given access to materials and encouragement? I'm starting to lean towards the latter, and it may be time to consider laws that prohibit law enforcement from providing explosive materials or weapons, both fake and real, as 'support' to an individual or individuals that have not been able to acquire them on their own through other sources. It's one thing for the mole to give the would-be terrorist a fake detonator to use on the real explosives that the individual acquired, but it's another matter entirely to give them what they think is a thousand pound bomb as the entire basis for the criminal complaint when they probably couldn't have acquired it themselves anyway.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

the Stanford Prison Experiment. There good men played the role of prison guards and instantly changed into sadistic assholes.

Or, sadistic assholes were allowed to remove their "good guy" mask, and reveal their true personality.

Re: masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

If they got one innocent person personal into trouble, then job poorly done.

Now the intersection between mentally ill and innocent is a bit tough, but it can meet, and the FBI can create a problem of its own making.

That s troublesome to consider, is that the best route?what if the FBI had gotten this person counseling instead?

Re:masdf

[sjames]

The answer was in your first paragraph. If the FBI allows themselves to be 'recruited' into the action, then arrests everyone once the plan is about to happen, I would be fine with it. That's not what they are doing these days.

Instead, the FBI actively recruits people to their fake cause.

Re:masdf

[murkwood7]

So once again, the FBI entraps someone by convincing them to carry out an attack so that they can stop it and pretend to be heroes. How about actually stopping attacks that you haven't yourself created? Oh, right. That count is still at zero. And I guess you need to justify all your bullshit somehow.

Says a lot, coming from a fucking C.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

The FBI is either very good at catching terrorists before they even plan their attacks, or they are going out and setting people up.

This is standard FBI SOP. Catching terrorists is easy when you set the whole thing up yourself, catching real terrorists is more difficult, dangerous, and requires actual police work. The FBI is well known for creating phoney plots in order to toot their own horn for more powers and funding. http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/05/01/230223/ny-times-fbi-foils-its-own-terrorist-plots

Re:masdf

[rsilvergun]

Also don't forget, it's better to punish a 1000 innocent men than risk letting 1 guilty one go free.

Re:masdf

[cold fjord]

What makes him dangerous is filling his head with dangerous thoughts.

What makes him danerous is that his head was filled with dangerous thoughts BEFORE the FBI ever spoke to him. He had stated his interest in Jihad, killing, and dying for the cause. He demonstrated his willingness to carry through his stated intent and actually attempt an attack. Youve got this wrong.

The vast majority, if not all, of the people whom the FBI have entrapped in the past are some of the more vulnerable members of society: people without a strong social support structure, part of a marginalised community, often poor, often unemployed, and so on.

That's a fine assertion. Do you have any proof? There have been at least hundreds of arrests and convictions for offenses related to terrorism. If what you claim is true there should be some proof.

Do the poor, unemployed, or marginalized have a right to engage in terrorism? Is there some reason they shouldn't be stopped from killing people? Aren't the rights of other people in society to not be attacked equally important?

It's a fundamental axiom of modern policing that the best way to stop crime is to stop people from becoming criminals in the first place. If someone is at risk of becoming a criminal, the best thing you can do is divert them away from that as early as possible.

If you bother to look into this, including the story I linked to, you'll see the FBI tried to divert him. They got him to a Muslim cleric to try to talk him out of it. He persisted.

For the FBI to turn a non-criminal into a criminal is not just a failure, it's sociopathic.

You are fabricating things out of whole cloth. Is there a DSMV label for that?

Re:masdf

[yzf750]

Do you have a source for that? Certainly there are narcs, but I've never heard of any of them enrolling in high schools undercover. Cops threatening high school kids who got caught anyway to cough up some names, sure. But when they invest an undercover agent (= lots of money), it's going to be for a big investigation, not to find out which high school kid sold a dimebag to which other high school kid.

http://www.chron.com/neighborh...

There you go. The story quotes one of the sheriffs stating that they have done this in other cities throughout the county as well.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

I am almost amazed that there are so few successful terrorist attacks. It's not just airplanes. In NYC, there are thousands of people packed into sidewalks in the morning commute, and almost no security. If there really are serious terrorists out there, there are some really easy targets they're ignoring.

Re:masdf

[whoever57]

Strawman argument.

Re:masdf

[TsuruchiBrian]

It was a rhetorical question.

Re:masdf

[JWSmythe]

It would actually have the opposite effect. Rather than willingly taking on co-conspirators, a would-be attacker is more likely to be paranoid of everyone and not let anyone know his plans.

That brings us full circle back to the "He was a nice guy. Very quiet. Kept to himself. He didn't leave the basement much. We were really surprised to hear about [some action] on the news."

Without co-conspirators who turn on him, or accidentally trusting investigators as co-conspirators, or getting caught buying supplies, that makes them much harder to find until the attack happens.

I'm not saying that investigators instigating someone who could be an attacker, into actually doing an attack in a horribly flawed way (like a bomb made of 2000 pounds of dirt) is a good thing. I don't know everything that happened. I've only seen a few news reports on this one. If he really was the instigator and the investigators just provided some technical "assistance" in making a dud bomb, that was probably a good thing.

If they just picked a random target with little interest, and convinced him that he must make the dud bomb so they can bust him in a terrorist plot, that's something else entire, and they will get bitchslapped by the courts for it.

Re:masdf

[ganjadude]

dont believe everything you see here. Ive lived in an arera where this thing has happened. they even made a HBO special on it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

The point of view of the documentary is that it was later brought to light that the plot with the four men who were coaxed into participating was created by the FBI. The men argue that this was a case of entrapment.

Re:masdf

[Darinbob]

Depending upon the entrapment, it can become a valid defense according to the courts. The key point is whether the defendant would have committed the crime without the lure. For example, an innocuous car parked amongst other cars that then gets stole isn't entrapment; but a car parked with all windows rolled down and keys left in the ignition on a deserted street while the cops monitor it is counted as entrapment.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

You should really understand what legal 'entrapment' actually consists of before saying that. Because a lot of things people think are entrapment don't count.

And yes, it's perfectly legitimate to put out bait cars and whatnot to give opportunities to commit a crime. It's not their fault if you say "yes" if someone invites you to engage in criminal activity.

Re: masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

If the fashion is "not blowing people to bits" then I'm a fascist.

Re:masdf

[MrDoh!]

I'm waiting for the guy in the sting to go to the press and say "look what the FBI is trying to do! I was just playing along to let them provide the evidence, they're anti american and want to kill people just to up their budget".

Re:masdf

[Agripa]

It would have been impossible for the many people the FBI have entrapped to proceed without the FBI's large amount of help. A vast majority of planning and resources were provided by the FBI. Why aren't *those* people criminally charged? They did more than the patsy now under arrest.

Re:masdf

[Agripa]

The guys who helped them and were paid by the FBI were not charged with anything.

Re: masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

So we should put all Muslims in a camp? End of problem.

Re:masdf

[Hognoxious]

You see a clear statement of intent. Others see what we refer to in the Queen's English as gobbing off.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll personally throw myself on any potential box knives for two extra inches of foot room.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

It is only because the NSA stores billions of people's daily lives that the USA is safe, now if you'll help Silicon Valley get the rest of the world online so the NSA can track the entire population we will never have a single death again.

Re:masdf

[Agripa]

If they prevented one innocent person from dying, its a job well done.

Shouldn't we apply the same standard for innocent bystanders that the FBI has injured or killed?

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'll fuckin' deck you, mate," is an unambiguously clear statement of intent, and all the FBI was doing here is supplying a garden centre brochure which falls open at the Patios section..

Re:masdf

[mellon]

Is the word "entrapment" mentioned anywhere in the message to which you are replying?

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, these are the same people that are easily exploited and swayed into terrorist acts.

If they're that malleable, then they should be able to be steered into being a productive member of society instead of being a criminal. The FBI had a choice about which they could do. They chose the one which would give them a headline and a story on Slashdot.

You know they are competing with actual extremist groups for these types right? Take responsibility for your own actions or intent.

Re:masdf

[0111 1110]

That guy was committed to make an attack and die in the process before he came into contact with the FBI.

You know him? Personally? No? Then stfu. You have no evidence that this was true.

No, they are trying to prove that guy culpable for his actions in a court of law.

To whatever extent this guy is guilty of some imaginary crime the FBI agents are guilty as well. Oh right...sorry...you don't want the FBI agents in jail? Well that is *exactly* where they belong imo. Getting butt fucked by bubba all day and all night. That is what they truly deserve. Irresponsible, immoral fucks playing their little games instead of actually doing their jobs.

Re: masdf

[Pseudonym]

We should work with the Muslim community to help people who are at risk to become productive members of society.

Re:masdf

[Mr D from 63]

Well, that is another topic entirely unrelated to this discussion.

The FBI is out killing innocent people, for no reason? And how often is that happening?

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't have even bothered to read the article because your comment is nonsensical (if not an outright deception) in the context of this, "... two FBI agents brought Booker to him early in 2014 for counseling, hoping to turn the young man away from radical beliefs."

Now what part of that fits with "convincing them to carry out an attack"?

Re:masdf

[Hognoxious]

No it's not. If it was, Rugby matches would be 5-a-side after 30 minutes and by 10 p.m. on Friday the pubs would just close because all the customers were in casualty & police cells.

Have you ever even been outside?

Re:masdf

[Agripa]

The FBI has a history of precipitating gun fights where bystanders were shot by the FBI or just shooting into areas were people were present without positively identifying their targets.

Re:masdf

[Mr D from 63]

The FBI has a history of precipitating gun fights where bystanders were shot by the FBI or just shooting into areas were people were present without positively identifying their targets.

LOL. This is actually extremely rare. How many can you reference?

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

How many of the world's terrorist attacks are false flag attacks using pliable dummies fora patsy?

Re:masdf

[Reziac]

"When four men sit down to talk conspiracy, three are government agents and the fourth is a fool."
-- Russian proverb

Re: masdf

[billdale]

You're scary to the max, dude. You want to, assume anybody who's ever been arrested for terrorism has been entrapped and coached into doing so, and that anybody who has ever arrested anyone for such crimes is an evil, despicable "infidel". Yup, you scare me, fella, and I, hope somebody... an FB I agent, Homeland Security, your local and state cops... now have YOU under scrutiny. That deadbeat in North Carolina, who was running from a cop to keep from being arrested for nonpayment of child support after just buying a Mercedes did not deserve to die. Not the kind of jackass I'd want for a neighbor, but still did not deserve to be shot in the back. The cop that shot him had no reason whatsoever to shoot him and is now looking at a possible death penalty for having violated that scumbag ' s civil rights. Our laws are not perfect, nor are those who are paid to protect us and keep the peace. But nothing is perfect, and the fact that scads of police departments all over the country-- including where that shooting took place-- are making all their officers wear body cams. What's more, if for any reason a cop's camera is not turned on during even routine traffic stops, they face disciplinary action, even dismissal. Not perfect, but the strings get tighter, the bad guys-- whether jihadists or crooked, demented cops-- need to know they CAN, be caught-- and those of us that just want civil calm without the fear of Boston Marathon bombers begin to worry when we hear the kinds of paranoid insanity you spew. Now, cool down before you find yourself one day out there trying to build improvised explosive devices to "avenge Big Brother".

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, its Cold Fjord, he has a mental illness where he only sees the most extremist right-wing version of anything he reads.

It is worse than that. If he/she was "extremist right wing" Cold Fjord would not be defending the U.S. pretty much ever...currency, education, foreign policy, tax-exempt "religion", NSA and CIA treason...none of it is "right wing" ... it is centralized, anti-free market, anti-U.S. independence, pro-internationalism and pro empire-building and meddling around the world, endless entangling alliances, endless war to make the world "safe"...nothing the U.S. was ever supposed to be about.

"police the world" is not a "right wing extremist" activity...that is closer to communism, everyone must "cooperate" with the self-appointed "world police" who really just want everyone else's property and money to redistribute it in a manner more to their suiting... pretty much entirely for economic reasons and to make global corporations happy, "morals" are never the primary reason for any intervention or war

These are statements of fact and reality of current situations, not political or favoring any politics over any others, just reality.

Also, this is why so much of Fox News is retarded: none of what they say matches reality. If them and their viewers were really "right wing" they would have rebelled or seceded by now. They like money, they don't care about politics at all, just one giant smokescreen of faux outrage, to make more money.

Cold Fjord is many things...he/she is not "right wing" ... "extremist" yes, sure.

It is important to recognize, the U.S. really has no "left" or "right" of any importance at all...any "assistance" or things done for the "public" is nearly always funneling taxpayer money to make some private corporation happy, and we are so far from free markets and so in love with government-enforced monopolies, there is nothing for the honest "right" who actually desires freedom to really be happy about.

Understand, both the "right" and the "left" have lost big in the U.S. over the years.

People who have gained are corporatists and internationalists. Not a big part of "left" or "right" ideal situations, at all. To some of the "left" that may be desirable, but certainly not our corporate-favored implementation and incessant hatred for the poor and disenfranchised.

To the "right wing" Cold Fjord's steadfast defense of U.S. treason makes him/her a communist (or, at best, a "useful idiot") and expert at doublespeak...there's not much to defend about the U.S. anymore for "the right" it is all gone at this point

To the "left wing" Cold Fjord is just another tool of the bourgeois, blissfully unaware he/she is shooting themselves in the foot.

Also, you shouldn't assume Cold Fjord is dumb or does not know how unbalanced and deranged he/she is. Part of propaganda and conditioning others is remaining silent and ignoring anything that is an unacceptable viewpoint.

If Cold Fjord actually responded to people's posts or treated them as equals, that would be tacit acceptance that their viewpoints might have validity. The prolonged strategy of completely ignoring what people say, is not an accident, but a deliberate mechanism of propaganda enforcement.

That is not to accuse Cold Fjord of being a spook or other astro turfer. That is to say he/she uses the same techniques, if not intentionally, far more than the average poster.

Cold Fjord is not good or bad, not evil or worthy...just their mind is already made up before anything you post. You don't have to demonize Cold Fjord, use it as a learning experience, this is how to communicate with children.

Sure, don't jump in the fire, keep a safe distance, don't stoop to that level, don't become emotionally attached when someone is being completely insane.

But you can learn a lot from a dummy, if you are observant and pay attention.

Cold Fjord thrives on passive agressiveness, loves it when you flip out,

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Cold Fjord is not a file of unique contents or thoughts, informed over the years.

Cold Fjord is a part of the filesystem, indistinguishable from it.

When you think Cold Fjord, think "dot dot" or "dittohead" ... just repeats whatever the ruling class wants you to think.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

You have stated the first thought that came to me when I read this article. Thanks, it saved me the time of reading the rest of the comments (only kidding, all the comments have value).

Re: masdf

[LinuxLuver]

Also.... This guy's enlistment in the army was canceled. Why? Is he a bit crazy maybe? Entrapping the mentally ill wouldn't be too hard.....eh.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

If you cat Cold Fjord's post, it is like catenating a directory entry...you just get garbage, vague speckles of other viewpoints. There is nothing actually in there that is unique to Cold Fjord.

Think hardware, not software. Fixed, pre-determined, not capable of being refactored.

If you want to change Cold Fjord's viewpoint, you just change the government he/she points to, and Cold Fjord will happily acquisce, completely unaware.

Midgets from Zanzibar took over the U.S. ? Cold Fjord is now on their side, no question, this is simply not a big deal.

To accuse Cold Fjord of "right wing extremism" is to fundamentally misunderstand the inner nature, the spirit, the essence of Cold Fjord. It is much simpler than that.

You can pry at Cold Fjord and claw at him/her all day long, when you finally slice an incision across his/her belly...there is just air.

No robotic parts. No bleeding heart. No green oozing alien blood.

Just a steady current of hot air, pouring out, blowing towards the current power elite.

Learn to leverage Cold Fjord for your own uses, as a portable fan, like an invincible door stop.

Think of Cold Fjord like a picture on the wall, a vase of artificial flowers, a decoration.

When you bring guests to Slashdot, kindly and non-chalantly (humble, not in a bragging manner) mention "oh, by the by, have you seen my magical Cold Fjord yet? Truly, truly an amazing device"

Amazing, it always points up, oblivious to the entire world and everything in it.

It is like a drinking bird...you want Cold Fjord to drink fruit punch today instead of water? Just lay that in his/her path, he/she will gulp it right up, the effortless nodding notifying you how delicious it all is.

Want Cold Fjord to defend coca cola? Fill it right up, there it goes...and Cold Fjord is off.

Cold Fjord is just misunderstood, that's all.

I understand, I get it. You people just don't understand Cold Fjord, that's all.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Without a directory to suck up to, Cold Fjord is NULL, empty, points nowhere.

You misunderstand Cold Fjord, to attribute sentience or rational thought to him/her.

A pointer. You can't take the ruling elite away from him/her ... there would literally be nothing left.

That would be inhumanely cruel.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Cold Fjord is not a partisan prostitute..."right wing extremism" ... no, Cold Fjord is much sluttier for anything halfway approaching a consistent viewpoint.

Got power? Cold Fjord is there to glorify and validate and defend you. That's about it, really.

Broke? Hungry? Tired? Principled? Consistent? Coherent? Maybe...do you have any power? I like power. Power good.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

This post is so true! I wish people would read this many times over.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't it better to let a guilty person go free than arrest and convict an innocent? What has happened to people and justice?

Re: masdf

[meta-monkey]

But that's exactly what happened. This guy was the one who was posting on FB about wanting to blow people up. He advertised. The FBI answered. Not the other way around.

To be fair, the other way around would be fine too. "Anybody want to blow people up?" Arrest people who say yes.

Basically, if you're willing to press the button to blow up innocent people (without duress, under your own free will) you should be removed from society.

Re: masdf

[sjames]

He was just shooting his mouth off. Hard to say how seriously. He wasn't asking for applications.

Then the FBI told him "we have a plan and we can get a bomb, wanna join?". In other words, backwards from the acceptable position.

Re:masdf

[mellon]

Sweet! Where do I sign? Wait, is NSA into life extension therapy as well as surveillance?

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, stings like this may prevent actual attacks from occurring by providing a deterrent. Would you join such a conspiracy if your co-conspirators might be FBI agents? Operations like these send a message out to would-be terrorists: you're not safe planning attacks in this country.

No don't see it.
But why is it EVERY attack stopped the FBI was in the planning of it. This is just propaganda in this truest form.

Re:masdf

[lsatenstein]

That doesn't make him less dangerous.

What makes him dangerous is filling his head with dangerous thoughts. The vast majority, if not all, of the people whom the FBI have entrapped in the past are some of the more vulnerable members of society: people without a strong social support structure, part of a marginalised community, often poor, often unemployed, and so on.

It's a fundamental axiom of modern policing that the best way to stop crime is to stop people from becoming criminals in the first place. If someone is at risk of becoming a criminal, the best thing you can do is divert them away from that as early as possible. For the FBI to turn a non-criminal into a criminal is not just a failure, it's sociopathic.

What you say is not the American way. Why is it not? Well, the prison system has to expand, otherwise the law enforcement system would not be doing their jobs and there might be job cuts.

Unlike the Danish, which work to rehabilitate, the American system works to incarcerate.

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit, there are way too many of these created cases. They arent a sting, in more than one the Feds pushed someone over the edge to commit the act. These are NOT stings, its a rogue agency justifying its existence.

Re:masdf

[Agent0013]

Do you have a source for that? Certainly there are narcs, but I've never heard of any of them enrolling in high schools undercover. Cops threatening high school kids who got caught anyway to cough up some names, sure. But when they invest an undercover agent (= lots of money), it's going to be for a big investigation, not to find out which high school kid sold a dimebag to which other high school kid.

I heard the story on NPR where a highschool kid gets a crush on a new girl. The girl asks him to get her some drugs. He isn't a dealer, nor does he even do drugs, but he talks to some people and is able to get her some where he gets busted for his reward. http://www.alternet.org/story/...

It doesn't sound like an isolated incident either. http://www.opposingviews.com/i...

Re:masdf

[Anonymous Coward]

Protip: never, ever use the Stanford Prison Experiment as evidence. It was incredibly shitty science. The investigator in charge actively interfered with the participants, selectively reported data (a bunch of guards actually weren't assholes), and it hasn't been repeatable.

LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Stupid Fuck!

Not the brightest bulb in the box

[93 Escort Wagon]

He posted it on Facebook?!

Of course you're not going to get too many rocket scientists wanting to die a martyr's death; but still...

Re:Not the brightest bulb in the box

[penguinoid]

He posted it on Facebook?!

Clearly Mr Booker's plan was to gain the trust of evil people planning nefarious activities by publicly pretending to be such himself. Then he could thwart their schemes and report them to the FBI...

Oh well

[Anonymous Coward]

The community should help people that have lost their way. But its so much mor fun to entice people to do crimes (as an acting official of the community) and then lock them up...

These officials should go to jail too...

Re: Oh well

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you.

He should have been executed and dumped in a river.

Why the fuck do we have to help shitbags? I can only imagine that you empathize with him, in which case you should be executed too.

Alternative title

[whoever57]

FBI sets up naive person and then arrests him when he follows instructions from his FBI handlers.

Re:Alternative title

[circletimessquare]

it's not entrapment

it really isn't

entrapment is getting you to do something you don't want to do

if the guy expresses his sincere, original desire to do something, no coaxing, no suggestion, that's 100% on him

i don't know why so many people don't understand what entrapment is

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact that someone would join in with an attack they believed was real, even if it was not, does indicate to me that they belong in prison. It's not as though there aren't any terrorists trying to recruit idiots like them....

Re:Alternative title

[whoever57]

it's not entrapment

Just because it doesn't fit the legal definition of entrapment doesn't mean that it isn't morally entrapment.

In this case, yes, the guy had the desire to do something. However, he did not and would never have had the capability to do anything. There was no public safety justificaton for this FBI operation.

Re:Alternative title

[quantaman]

it's not entrapment

it really isn't

entrapment is getting you to do something you don't want to do

if the guy expresses his sincere, original desire to do something, no coaxing, no suggestion, that's 100% on him

i don't know why so many people don't understand what entrapment is

No it isn't. Entrapment is getting you to do something you wouldn't have done otherwise.

In this case the FBI recruited Booker, planned the plot, and then gave him the materials to carry out the plot.

Now this kid obviously has some serious issues, he was basically asking for an ISIS recruiter to come along and find him, if one didn't come along there is a possibility he would have eventually committed a lone attack on his own.

That being said he also might have grown out of it, either way I suspect that both Booker and society would have been much better served with some court mandated counselling. The major justification for this operation is the FBI showing they can thwart a major terrorist operation by thwarting their own operation (though they're also hopefully making it more difficult for actual recruiters).

Re:Alternative title

[stdarg]

Having someone out there wishing to die as a martyr is a public safety issue for sure and provides more than enough justification for the operation.

If every wannabe martyr is arrested, nothing of value will be lost, don't worry.

Re:Alternative title

[circletimessquare]

he expressed a sincere, clear, sustained desire to mass murder, then went through the motions to do exactly that, only neutralized by fbi providing him with dummy equipment

if the fbi wasn't around, he would have figured out how to buy gasoline or fertilizer on his own, or he would have hooked up with a genuinely malicious crew

intent, do you what that is? do you know what that means in terms of morality and law?

if you INTEND to do harm, stopping you from following through on your intent is doing good in the world, and removing you from society for being a murderous asshole is doing good in the world

it's not entrapment. it does not fit the definition of the concept, which you don't seem to understand

it's neutralization of dangerous assholes before they cause great harm

understand intent. understand entrapment. then comment on this topic. you don't seem to have the moral or social faculties to comment intelligently at this time, as you don't seem to understand the concepts involved

Re:Alternative title

[whoever57]

if the fbi wasn't around, he would have figured out how to buy gasoline or fertilizer on his own, or he would have hooked up with a genuinely malicious crew

And you know this how? Isn't this the concept of "pre-crime"

if you INTEND to do harm, stopping you from following through on your intent is doing good in the world, and removing you from society for being a murderous asshole is doing good in the world

So we should prosecute "thought crime" should we?

it's not entrapment. it does not fit the definition of the concept, which you don't seem to understand

And you just showed that your reading skills are poor. I agreed that it did not fit the legal definition of entrapment.

understand intent. understand entrapment. then comment on this topic. you don't seem to have the moral or social faculties to comment intelligently at this time, as you don't seem to understand the concepts involved

The refuge of the weak of mind: an ad-hominem argument.

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

He wanted to die for a cause. He signed up for the chance with the US army. The FBI gave him a guaranteed opportunity with jihad. If it weren't for the FBI this person would be called a hero, a patriot, and thanked profusely for his service.

It was entrapment to push him in a direction that he otherwise would not have gone.

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

And that's the same logic error many people continually are making in this thread to justify the FBI's irresponsible behavior.

Yes, he was a public safety issue. That is justification itself to go after him. It is not justification for the FBI to give him material support and training only makes him more dangerous.

What if the got cold feet at the last minute and ran off, only to carry out his own attack? In this alternate reality, the FBI would have been in a position to stop him, but only fueled him, and innocents are the ones to pay.

Re:Alternative title

[circletimessquare]

you do not fucking understand the concept of entrapment. stop talking about a concept you do not understand

sting: cops leave a car with the keys in the ignition where a suspected car thief walks every day. he steals the car. he's arrested, validly, for theft

entrapment: cop walks up to suspected thief: "here's the keys to that car, it's yours to take." he takes the car. he's arrest- invalidly. he should not go to jail and he should sue the police for entrapment

it's about *intent*. if you form the intent to do something malicious on your own, you are not entrapped. you are a criminal

please try to understand the fucking topic before injecting yourself into it

Re:Alternative title

[circletimessquare]

he wasn't pushed

he clearly articulated an intent over a sustained period of time of his own organic desire

how can you call yourself a moral person and not understand the concept of intent?

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

EXACTLY!

And in this case the equivalent would be:

Kids continuously mouths off about wanting to steal a car down at the bar, so when he leaves after having a few
drinks (equivalent of this kid currently showing significant mental health issues which is already on record) an
undercover who has been acting as his friend hands him the keys to a car in the parking lot and says 'this car
belongs to an arsehole we hate, we have your back, go on, prove you are one of us by stealing it!' then when
the kid starts the car, arrests him.

That is, as you clearly agree, entrapment.

Sure, the kid had/has some pretty damn major issues. he needs help. Instead he has been taken advantage of
by the feds to further their desire for more power over the rest of us, in the name of protecting us.

Go USA!

Re:Alternative title

[quantaman]

he expressed a sincere, clear, sustained desire to mass murder, then went through the motions to do exactly that, only neutralized by fbi providing him with dummy equipment

Half right. He expressed the desire, but it was the FBI who prompted him to go through the motions.

if the fbi wasn't around, he would have figured out how to buy gasoline or fertilizer on his own, or he would have hooked up with a genuinely malicious crew

Possibly.

intent, do you what that is? do you know what that means in terms of morality and law?

if you INTEND to do harm, stopping you from following through on your intent is doing good in the world, and removing you from society for being a murderous asshole is doing good in the world

We don't know that he had genuine intent before the FBI intervened because he was all talk at that point.

it's not entrapment. it does not fit the definition of the concept, which you don't seem to understand

it's neutralization of dangerous assholes before they cause great harm

understand intent. understand entrapment. then comment on this topic. you don't seem to have the moral or social faculties to comment intelligently at this time, as you don't seem to understand the concepts involved

I forgot to mention in my original response that I don't think for a moment a US court would rule this as entrapment.

However, I do think you're significantly underestimating the degree of influence the FBI may have had. This was a very troubled person and was obviously very susceptible for being recruited into being a jihadist.

However, that in itself isn't a crime, planning or committing a terror plot is a crime, and when the FBI is the one supplying the crime and the prompt I find that problematic. They've taken him an at-risk individual and turned him into a terrorist, I think there were better ways to handle it.

Re:Alternative title

[circletimessquare]

he articulated a clear intent over a sustained period of time

if the fbi wasn't around, he'd figure out how to buy fertilizer and gasoline, or hook up with a malicious crew

your argument is he has no sustained willpower and would have backed out? how do you know that? why are you projecting such assumptions? and even if he had weak willpower, how much willpower exactly does it take to drive a van with fertilizer and gasoline and throw a match?

the man did not back out or back down. he wanted to mass murder. his own original organic desire

Re:Alternative title

[circletimessquare]

he articulated a clear desire to do harm over a sustained period of time

if the fbi wasn't around, he'd do it on his own or hook up with a malicious crew

are you saying he was weak willed and would not have gone through with it without fbi prodding?

how much willpower exactly does it take to drive a van with gasoline and fertilizer and throw a match?

you have this bizarre notion of malicious intent, as if it wouldn't exist without the fbi around. that's stupid

if timothy mcveigh was put in sting by the fbi, morons like you would be crying entrapment, that a weak willed fool like mcveigh wouldn't have done anything without the fbi involved

you don't even understand entrapment, and you have this insane notion malice only exists with government involvement, and you think you have to be a steel willed criminal mastermind to do harm

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever played online games?
Ever seen how many sustained malicious threats per hour are made on there?
Should the FBI 'sting' all those people in the off chance some of them are unstable enough to go along for the ride?

*I* have clear evidence, as stated clearly in the articles, that he was emotionally unstable and needed treatment.
What do *you* have other that a hatred of muslims? or do you prefer to call them sand niggers? sounds about your style.

The kid needed help, instead the government used him as a way to gain more power over YOU. Does it feel good?

I notice your sig is making a clear and sustained threat to break a law. I am assuming you are good with the FBI organising a 'sting'
for the good of those nice law abiding music industry execs by giving you some music to download, and then bringing the hammer
down? Hell, they should go for broke and drop a little miss-named child porn in there, that would be even better for society!
Think of the children!

Re:Alternative title

[TsuruchiBrian]

They should hire you to work at the FBI since you know what everyone is capable of.

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

sting: cops leave a car with the keys in the ignition where a suspected car thief walks every day. he steals the car. he's arrested, validly, for theft

entrapment: cop walks up to suspected thief: "here's the keys to that car, it's yours to take." he takes the car. he's arrest- invalidly. he should not go to jail and he should sue the police for entrapment

Your example of entrapment is really a cop giving a guy a car and false arrest.
Actual entrapment would include enticement to commit a crime. Take your sting example, add some cops going up to people and saying "hey buddy, somebody left the keys in that car. You could steal it right now!"

Re:Alternative title

[Livius]

if the guy expresses his sincere, original desire to do something

There's plenty of uncertainty about what this guy was thinking.

Re:Alternative title

[Kjella]

And you know this how? Isn't this the concept of "pre-crime" (...) So we should prosecute "thought crime" should we?

It's not a thought crime if you have the intent to go through with it when you have the means and opportunity. If you write stories about kidnapping a kid or roleplay it with your adult girlfriend, that's fantasy and a thought crime. If someone provides you with ether, a getaway van with stolen plates and point out a secluded place where a kid likes to play alone late at night and you get caught trying to actually kidnap a child that's no longer a thought crime. Which is why we catch them in the act or reasonably close to, not where they might have any "alternate future" in which they don't go through with it.

Making it appear like the risk/reward ratio is in your favor is not entrapment. Maybe you wouldn't have taken the time and effort or found the courage to find/learn/make/use those means and opportunities yourself, but it's still not thought crime. It's more like real, unreleased criminal potential where they're testing your answer to "If you knew you could get away with it, would you....?" which is an entirely different question than "Do you ever dream of....?" because one implies a desire to carry it out in the real world and the other one doesn't. That's a rather important distinction.

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

>entrapment is getting you to do something you don't want to do

No, it's doing something you wouldn't normally do unless an LEO has coerced you to do it.

Re:Alternative title

[meta-monkey]

No it isn't. Entrapment is getting you to do something you wouldn't have done otherwise.

No, it isn't. Entrapment is the coercion of your free will. Putting you under duress and essentially forcing you to do something illegal, then arresting you.

So long as you're free to turn around and walk away, it isn't entrapment. Even if the cops offer to pay you to commit a crime, it's still not entrapment. It's perfectly okay to sting hit men by offering money for murder-for-hire then arresting the people who take them up on the offer.

Nobody forced this guy to do anything. He wanted to blow people up. He wanted to be a martyr. He posted about it on FaceBook. He was 100% willing to go through with the plan, and was right there willing to push the button. Thank you FBI for getting him off the street and behind bars where he can't hurt anybody.

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

jihadi: I'm going to kill a bunch of people
undercover agent: How's that
Jihadi: I'm going to build this bomb
agent: how
Jihadi: Here's my plan, can you buy this for me?
agent: Okay
[gets fake explosives]

Idiots: Fucking FBI entrapment!

Re:Alternative title

[whoever57]

you do not fucking understand the concept of entrapment. stop talking about a concept you do not understand

Is your anger or stupidity so great that you have to keep insisting that I am claiming entrapment, when I am not? But even in your examples: you say: cop gives person to keys to car, says go steal it: entrapment. In this case: FBI gives bomb to suspect, says: go use it. How is this different? What was the intent of the recipient of the car keys in your example?

it's about *intent*. if you form the intent to do something malicious on your own, you are not entrapped. you are a criminal

So let's talk about intent. No-one knows what is truly in someone else's mind. We can only infer this from a person's words and actions. So, let's look at this person's words and actions and see if an alternative intent fits the known facts:

The accused person isn't the brightest person around. Imagine that he was worried about radical muslims and he formed the idea of catching some and turning them over to the FBI. So, what does he do? He goes on a fishing expedition for radicals by posting requests for a handler who will help him plant a bomb. He is contacted by someone who appears to be a radical muslim. He is careful not to build a bomb himself, but instead, he lets the supposed radical build a bomb and show him how to use it. His plan is to drive off with the bomb and then show it to the FBI as proof of the handler's intentions, however, his plan breaks down because he is arrested before he can hand it over to the FBI.

As you can see, the above narrative fits the known facts, yet it presents an intent which is 180 degrees from the intent that you presume.

Re:Alternative title

[Jeremi]

entrapment: cop walks up to suspected thief: "here's the keys to that car, it's yours to take." he takes the car. he's arrest- invalidly. he should not go to jail and he should sue the police for entrapment

entrapment: undercover agent walks up to suspected terrorist: "here's the trigger to that bomb, it's yours to detonate." he (attempts to) detonate the bomb. he's arrested -- invalidly?

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

Entrapment: A cop walks up to the suspected thief, and says "There are keys in that car, you really should take it, come on, might as well take it, here's what you should do - you should take it."

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

They should hire you to work at the FBI since you know who would really commit these crimes.

Re:Alternative title

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, its a form of entrapment or its a form of "future crime". We don't really know what he was thinking, he could have been writing about a fantasy that was then given some realistic form of events. The only way we would have known that he would do it would be giving him a dummy switch and watching him press it. Then we would be SURE he would do it. Otherwise its all speculation and BS. Absolutely a form of entrapment.

Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet another plot created and foiled by the FBI.

Basic bomb-making is easy. Basic bomb-making instructions are easy to obtain. Basic bomb ingredients are easy to purchase legally with cash. Non-stupid terrorists don't need the FBI's help. Since bomb-making is so easy we should see more attacks if terrorists are so dangerous to us but we don't– in the west at least – the middle east is a whole other ballgame and do have something to actually be worried about.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[circletimessquare]

its not entrapment

the guy expressed his original, organic desire to do this. the fbi created nothing

why do so many people not understand the concept of entrapment?

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[meerling]

Anyone who passed high school science (or grade school if you're a bit older), or is literate and has access to the internet can figure out how to make bombs.
Sure the more powerful ones are either unstable, or more difficult to make, but often you can make up for a weaker explosive with a greater quantity.
This ain't rocket science, though it did lead to it eventually. :P

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[sjames]

I'm not sure, but as an example perhaps you could enlighten us?

I'm thinking he was about as likely as a typical internet tough guy to actually go anything untim the FBI did all the heavy lifting for him.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[Anonymous Coward]

If you've got all that talent and motivation, why the fuck are you going to remove yourself from the gene pool? Do something useful for the world. Go back to (or continue) school, then go interview for companies like SpaceX or PlanetLabs. Can't afford to go back to school or don't want to? Get involved with your local hackerspace and make a difference in someone else's life.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[stdarg]

Hard to imagine the leap from "internet tough guy" to "Here's a bomb, just arm it and press this button" in real life without plenty of fodder.

I mean there are a million times the guy could have backed out when he realized it was getting serious.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[bkmoore]

Anyone who passed high school science (or grade school if you're a bit older), or is literate and has access to the internet can figure out how to make bombs.

The hardest part in bomb making is not blowing yourself up in the process. Chemical reactions do not always scale well, especially ones that deal with explosive compounds.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[sjames]

Doesn't matter. I'm not claiming the seriousness was the issue, it was the level of motivation, the actual ability to create a plan, manage logistics, and execute the plan. I suspect that minus the FBI doing 99% of the work, dude would still have his butt planted on the couch talking about how he'd like to be a suicide bomber (one day, eventually, yeah, that'd be cool).

If stoners actually managed to do all the things they planned to do 'one day', we would live in a really strange place!

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[Anonymous Coward]

guy could have backed out

No he could not. Two reasons: 1.he is a mentally weak individual to begin with 2. when FBI undercover agents start to press you to do something even a healthy person will find it hard to resist.
#2 is an obvious entrapment by FBI, while punishing mentally ill/underdeveloped is really pointless, because there is so many. 99.99% of them are completely harmless and never go through (nor capable of going through) with anything unless FBI offers a helping hand. This is completely manufactured.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[circletimessquare]

intent, not iq, is the criminal notion here

being a criminal mastermind is not a requirement for mass murder. it does not take genius to buy gasoline and fertilizer in a van

only malicious *intent* matters, which was clearly formed and sustained by this douchebag in kansas

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[circletimessquare]

yes, he is mentally weak

and?

are you saying you have to be an iron willed genius to mass murder?

*intent*, clearly formed and sustained, is all that is needed, and this kansas douchebag clearly qualifies

you really think it takes intellect and force of will to buy fertilizer and gasoline in a van?

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[sjames]

You might want to read up on the Milgram, and Stanford experiments.

If he had ACTUALLY pushed the button on the dummy bomb, you would have a point about intent.

Otherwise, go ahead and credit me and my childhood friend with digging a hole all the way to China, because we certainly had the 'intent' to do so and that's what counts.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[weilawei]

*intent*, clearly formed and sustained, is all that is needed,

Actually, you need means, motive, and opportunity. There must be a guilty act, and the responsible party must show ability to commit the crime (not demonstrated, since the FBI did everything for him), the motive to commit the crime (clearly demonstrated), and opportunity to commit the crime (it is not clear he would have had opportunity without the FBI giving it to him).

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[WinstonWolfIT]

The hardest part in bomb making is not blowing yourself up in the process. Chemical reactions do not always scale well, especially ones that deal with explosive compounds.

Continue...

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[Anonymous Coward]

Continue...

He would, but he's no longer with us.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[WindBourne]

who said that he was an internet tough guy?
If he was pushing for attacks on America/the west, then he was a terrorists, which he has proven just that.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[stdarg]

Terrorists generally operate as parts of a larger group. Your argument is like saying "Well the 9/11 hijackers could not have *individually* hijacked all the those planes, so there was no ability on anyone's part to actually commit the crime, so clearly 9/11 was not a crime!" Obviously that's wrong.

If this guy was going to pull the trigger, and another guy was going to build the bomb, and another guy was going to plant it somewhere, then AS A GROUP they have the means, motive, and opportunity. The FBI was supplying some of that as part of a group, which is normal for terrorists.

Re:Terrorism brought to you by the FBI

[stdarg]

The person I replied to described him as "likely as a typical internet tough guy."

Entrapment

[Darinbob]

I'm sick of the FBI trying to convince us that they caught a terrorist, when all they really did was con someone into going along with their plan. These are most likely people who never would have attempted any of these actions if they had not been encouraged to do so. Often they FBI keeps working on the potential suspect for months, not accepting "no" for an answer until finally the potential suspect caves in.

In other words, the job for these FBI agents seems to be to recruit someone as a terrorist. I'd feel better about them if they actually caught real terrorists instead of creating them. They're doing nothing more than increasing statistics in order to get bigger budgets and more approval from the naive public. So let's hold them accountable to one criminal count for entrapment and another criminal count for defrauding the government, and maybe some court ordered psychological evaluation.

Re:Entrapment

[stdarg]

So do you have some kind of knowledge about how this radical resisted the FBI's advances?

Did he at some point call the police and say "Hey this guy is obviously a terrorist, you should arrest him?" and turn in the FBI agent? No? Then he's already past redemption.

Re:Entrapment

[bkmoore]

.... I'd feel better about them if they actually caught real terrorists instead of creating them.....

But that would require doing real, hard police work. Professional operational terrorists are familiar with the concept of OPSEC and do not post their plans on FaceBook or Twitter. They probably do not even use email or cell phones. It's far easier to conduct mass surveillance and then try to set up the young, gullible, and easily impressionable when they make a rant on FaceBook about Jihad. It's a bit like the DoHS claiming that every confiscated water bottle, nail clipper, or pair of safety scissors is a foiled hijacking.

Re:Entrapment

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck redemption.
I care about effective law enforcement. This is not.
This is FBI self-aggrandizement.

Re:Entrapment

[Darinbob]

So he's past redemption, so clearly the law enforcement can do whatever they hell the want, disregarding the law themselves? Remember the FBI already had him on the radar because others called in about this homeless guy, the FBI interviewed him, then the left him alone.

Maybe they should have gotten a warrant and put him under surveillance. Maybe that guy could have found some real terrorists (who'd probably shun him as being too mental).

They probably only put the sting on him because it looked like an easy +1 score, versus doing the hard leg work needed to actually keep people safe. This is just one of a long sequence of FBI entrapments on people who did not have the means or capability to cause mayhem. The FBI has not managed to break up even one terrorist plot, instead they have manufactured their own plots.

Just because some government goons throw around words like "terrorist" is no reason to let them do whatever they want. Or is it ok to give up our civil rights and give law enforcement whatever powers they want with no limits, just because someone shouts "terrorist" or "communist"?

Re:Entrapment

[stdarg]

So he's past redemption, so clearly the law enforcement can do whatever they hell the want, disregarding the law themselves?

No they can't do *whatever* they want, but testing him by putting him in a situation that he thinks is real that would be illegal for him to do is fine.

They probably only put the sting on him because it looked like an easy +1 score, versus doing the hard leg work needed to actually keep people safe.

This kind of work does keep people safe. Your bar is set too high.. you want the FBI to actually catch terrorists with their thumb on the trigger after having deployed actual live bombs, with no pre-knowledge. You've been watching "24" too much or something -- it's just not realistic.

The FBI has not managed to break up even one terrorist plot, instead they have manufactured their own plots.

These ARE terrorist plots. When you plot to plant bombs somewhere and blow up innocent people, that's a terrorist plot. WTF?

Or is it ok to give up our civil rights and give law enforcement whatever powers they want with no limits, just because someone shouts "terrorist" or "communist"?

No, and you're right that we have to stay vigilant. This is crying wolf though. It's not entrapment, it's not illegal for the FBI to do. They caught someone who was dangerous to our safety.

I'm waiting for them to come come for me

[Anonymous Coward]

I kinda posted about shutting down the government once or twice. Now I didn't say illegally shut it down... but... or make any threats... but who knows how they'll frame it. "He stated he was a terrorist looking to shut down the government". My conspirators will be slashdot users, hackers, and torrentfreak pirates.

These people are mostly being entrapped by government agents and wouldn't otherwise have acted on their intent. Some of us are just too lazy to start a revolution, but would otherwise support it. I'm thinking 95% of Americans. They're just targeting individuals based on racist policies and similar.

Re:I'm waiting for them to come come for me

[Anonymous Coward]

If you got some people agreeing with you on line and they made arrangements with you to get a bomb put together and set it off at a particular place and time, would you go through with it? If so, I hope you get caught.

in conspiracy with others who were actually FBI

[MrKaos]

Yet there is still no legal requirment for the oversight of these spying powers.

Out of curiosity

[Okian Warrior]

it's not entrapment

it really isn't

entrapment is getting you to do something you don't want to do

if the guy expresses his sincere, original desire to do something, no coaxing, no suggestion, that's 100% on him

i don't know why so many people don't understand what entrapment is

Huh. You don't say. And here I was reading some excerpts from the original complaint:

[The FBI supplied, what Booker understood was, the explosives (actually inert material) needed for the bomb, then:]

CHS 1(*) provided Booker with a list of supplies that they needed to purchase in order to build the bomb.

Booker understood that CHS 1 and CHS 2 would build the VBIED

CHS 2 explained the function of the inert VBIED to Booker and demonstrated how to arm the device.

Out of curiosity, does this look like "no coaxing, no suggestion, that's 100% on him" to you?

Because, it doesn't to me...

(*) CHS stands for "Confidential Human Source", and means "FBI undercover agent"

Re:Out of curiosity

[circletimessquare]

they gave him dummy material

1. if they didn't give him dummy material, he would have figured out how to buy gasoline and fertilizer, or he would have hooked up with a genuinely malicious crew

2. he didn't look at the dummy material and play paddy cake with it or discard it or give it away. he tried to use it to cause harm. that was clear, sustained intent

do you know what intent is?

it's obvious you don't know what entrapment is

if you don't understand the concepts involved, do not comment on a topic you don't understand

Re:Out of curiosity

[Okian Warrior]

if you don't understand the concepts involved, do not comment on a topic you don't understand

You stated - quite plainly - that this was "no coaching, no suggestion", obviously some strange legal definition of ""no coaching, no suggestion", of which I am unaware.

And of course, this is only coming from the complaint, which is the FBI's version of events.

If the FBI's version is this sketchy, what do you imagine the real situation was?

Or are you one of those people with "relatives in law enforcement", who have inside information about all officers being honest, forthright persons?

(Except for the ones caught on video, of course!)

Re:islamist radical?

[qubezz]

I doubt there would have been any attack unless he was "radicalized" by the FBI. He could have not had his enlistment in the US military canceled because of a Facebook post, and could have been taken in and counseled and put through boot camp instead of being manipulated like a foreign asset for months until he committed the crime that was orchestrated for him.

could never wrong. fast and furious, feds killed

[raymorris]

> What happens when one of their sting operations don't go according to plan? Maybe their guy goes a little nuts and decides to do things his own way,

A federal sting could NEVER go wrong. It's not like the federal government (illegally) provides weapons to murderous drug cartels, who then use exactly those weapons to kill border patrol officers and others. Well okay, that could happen, but if it did, they'd immediately put a stop to the program. They wouldn't KEEP selling weapons to organized crime even knowing the weapons were being used to kill people in Texas. Well surely they'd stop when the information became public. The feds wouldn't send Eric Holder to go lie to Congress about the whole thing.

Nothing like that could ever happen, because whatever the problem is, the federal government is always the solution. The feds are never the problem, and the Constitution is "just a piece of paper", ad one famous law professor / community organizer put it.

it's Kansas people, give him a break

[swell]

Gotta say, if I lived in Kansas when I was 20 years old, I mighta done something ... something strange too. As it is I lived in another midwest state, not quite as boring. I acted out. Nobody should live in such circumstances. Everyone knows your business. Gossip. Rumors. Spiteful neighbors. If you're not a devout Christian, forget being accepted. God help you if you are LGBT etc. A simple lapse of judgement when you sorta borrow a car or release some cash from a liquor store and you're marked like forever.

When you live in such a place, even the middle east must seem a paradise. Lots of activity; while home is just oppressive stagnation. Lots of fighting for things that people believe in rather than ho-hum useless voting every few years. Real people taking their future into their own hands and not sitting back hoping for some politician to make things right. That's what I'm talkin 'bout!

So, let's have some pity on the gullible lad manipulated by the spooks at the FBI. The worst he could really do is paint graffiti on the Post Office. When he gets older we can all laugh it off as one of those adolescent pranks. Except that he'll be in prison for a very long time because there is no exception in our legal system for people of low IQ who do stupid stuff.

Psyops

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminds me of when the military was caught sending units trained in PsyOps to talk to and influence members of government to get the results they wanted.

Honestly, especially with all the recent revelations over the past few years, can't really know for sure whether this guy was honestly going to do this the whole time or if they found an easy mark and pushed him to it to catch him for the good PR and attempting to justify their programs.

Also reminds me of how the Heath Ledger's Joker recruited his Henchmen on the Dark Knight movie.

So five thousand dead soldiers later...

[hyades1]

I just wanted to ask the post-Mission Accomplished George Bush: How's that "fight them over there so we won't have to fight them over here" strategy workin' out for ya, Sparky?"

Re:So five thousand dead soldiers later...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well Danny boy, I think it's time to reference a Col. Jessup quote right about now.
  The deaths of those "5000 soldiers", while tragic, probably saved lives. Possibly yours. Which proves it just wasn't worth it.
Now, I don't mind people that want to kvetch about Nixon and watergate, we all know the U.S. jumped the shark when we started appointing czars. That's the way double-speak works. Just don't tread too far into the stolen valor thing, we can surmise from your bitch like whining that you haven't fought anybody "over there",Your just one of those guys that believe the pen is mightier than the sword. Why don't you ask the infantry whether they give a damn about what you think you are entitled to.

Re:islamist radical?

[cold fjord]

I doubt there would have been any attack unless he was "radicalized" by the FBI.

The first of many holes in your theory is that the accused indicated his interest in dying in attacks before any contact with the FBI.

.... came to the attention of federal investigators after posting a Facebook message on March 19, 2014, that read: "Getting ready to be killed in jihad is a HUGE adrenaline rush! I am so nervous. NOT because I'm scared to die but I am eager to meet my lord,"

-----

He could have not had his enlistment in the US military canceled because of a Facebook post, and could have been taken in and counseled and put through boot camp instead of being manipulated like a foreign asset for months until he committed the crime that was orchestrated for him.

Basic training provides instruction on basic military skills, including weapons. To provide that training he would be given weapons and ammunition. I can't believe you think that is a good idea. You know about the Fort Hood attack, don't you? There have been other attacks as well.

The purpose of the military means it is best to keep people like him out.

Amateurs

[WinstonWolfIT]

When they start using cold drops to coordinate, that's when to start worrying. With surveillance as it is, they've got nothing better than a rogue or two using IEDs and assault rifles.

I missed something there

[Anonymous Coward]

Where is the bit that says he was a Christian suicide bomber/martyr?

If he'd been even slightly Muslm-ish, it'd be prominent.

But nowhere here is anything about his faith.

Re:I missed something there

[weilawei]

Indeed, you missed the first two paragraphs of the FA.

TOPEKA, Kan. — A 20-year-old man was arrested Friday while trying to arm what he thought was a 1,000-pound bomb near a Kansas military base as part of a plot to support the Islamic State group, federal prosecutors said.

John T. Booker Jr. is accused of planning a suicide attack at Fort Riley, about 70 miles west of Topeka. Prosecutors allege he told an FBI informant he wanted to kill Americans and engage in violent jihad on behalf of the terrorist group, and said he believed such an attack was justified because the Quran "says to kill your enemies wherever they are," according to a criminal complaint.

/yes, I know, nobody reads TFA

Re:I missed something there

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly, the lead-in is rarely the whole story. Sometimes it isn't even enough of the story to get an idea of the truth.

And quoting the federal prosecutors and their criminal complaint, yeah, they'd say the same thing if they were indicting a ham sandwich.

Re:could never wrong. fast and furious, feds kille

[tshawkins]

Lol, waiting for the outrage in 3..... 2...... 1......

Re:islamist radical?

[tshawkins]

Would he have had the means without thier support, there are loads of nutters roaming around raging at the world, most of it is just impotent rage. However if you stand them up, pander to thier psychosis, give them a box with bomb written on the side and point them at a bunch of picket fence citizens, dont be suprised if they dont go for it.

Re:could never wrong. fast and furious, feds kille

[TsuruchiBrian]

...so anarchy?

what??

[Thraxy]

I think my comment subject says it all.

Debunking a myth

[mean pun]

[...] while Muslim faith prescribes terrorism.

That myth was debunked yet again this week by Juan Cole's Top Ten Ways Islamic Law forbids Terrorism. See: http://www.juancole.com/2015/0...

Re: Debunking a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Juan Cole, noted expert on a fantasy world? One of his "debunking" claims is that the Qur'an prohibits aggressive warfare, which is belied by just about every Muslim army ever. Similarly, his other claims are at of with common practice in both historical and modern Islam.

Re: Debunking a myth

[mellon]

Christianity forbids warfare outright (Aquinas notwithstanding), and yet look at all the wars that have been fought in the name of Jesus, and all the "christian nations" that have fought wars for supposedly just causes. If you're going to lay terrorism at the feet of Islam, at least get the rest of the story straight.

Re: Debunking a myth

[mean pun]

One of his "debunking" claims is that the Qur'an prohibits aggressive warfare, which is belied by just about every Muslim army ever.

Even if your claim about Muslim armies was true, how does that refute Prof. Cole's claim that Islamic law prohibits this? That people do not always obey the laws of their religion is hardly a new revelation, and is certainly not restricted to Islamic cultures.

You're using ad hominem attack, and you're moving the goalposts. Weak.

Re: Debunking a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

What is Juan Cole's authority to make pronouncements about Islamic law? Is he a cleric? Is he a Muslim at all? It seems like you and he are appealing to irrelevant authority. Beyond that, some items in his list were not strongly linked to text in the Qur'an, but only to later authorities (like the Sunni authority for #5 -- how binding is that on Shias?) or hearsay (#8).

To elaborate: In Virginia, fornication is a crime. In Colorado, it's a federal crime to possess or use marijuana. That doesn't mean those laws are enforced, or even widely regarded as strong, proper rules. The fundamental fallacy that Juan Cole perpetrated was that a textual prohibition means a lick in the face of contrary practices. I don't think he is stupid enough to fall for it, but apparently you were.

Your contention that I was either arguing ad hominem or moving the goal posts shows that you missed the point, in addition to not knowing what those things mean.

Re:Debunking a myth

[hairyfeet]

I'm so damned tired of people not understanding how to read the Koran. Their prophet saw that with the other religions they would have conflicting passages so he wrote in a "fix" for this issue. Quite simply he wrote "If a passage comes later it supersedes the passages that came before" and by doing so fixed the issue of conflicting passages (because one had to have been wrote later than the other) in a single sentence.

By using the rule guess what you find? All the "religion of peace" passages are replaced by "jihad jihad jihad" written by the blind mullah in the 1700s, sorry I can't remember his name right off the bat. You cannot judge the Koran by the same rules you judge any other religion because they do not have the supersedes rule so with them you have to take the entire book as a whole, with the supersedes rule all conflicts are removed and whomever wrote the latest Hadiths overrules those that came before, simple as that.

Re:Debunking a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Separated at Birth: Juan Cole and Dr. Strangelove

http://www.israellycool.com/2012/01/08/separated-at-birth-229/

Re:Debunking a myth

[Crashmarik]

[...] while Muslim faith prescribes terrorism.

That myth was debunked yet again this week by Juan Cole's Top Ten Ways Islamic Law forbids Terrorism. See: http://www.juancole.com/2015/0...

http://freethoughtblogs.com/ta...

I hope you can retreat to your imaginary world.

Re:Debunking a myth

[Entrope]

Cole's thesis is that Islamic law forbids terrorism. The bailey version of the argument is that this is somehow relevant to modern life. The motte version is that there is textual support for this prohibition.

Personally, I think he knows that he is engaging in a motte-and-bailey argument. Did you realize what he did when you cited him?

Re:Debunking a myth

[mean pun]

Oooh, wow, I think I'll add a new rule then to let everyone transfer 10% of their income to my bank account.

Or perhaps we have to return from your fantasy land, and realise that your blind mullah Wosisname perhaps doesn't have the automatic authority you're claiming he has.

Re:Debunking a myth

[mean pun]

Did you realize what he did when you cited him?

Of course I realise what he's doing. He's trying to teach all the blithering idiots that are spouting facile astroturfed memes that the world is not as black-and-white as they are suggesting, that Muslims are not the moustache-twirling villains of Hollywood movies that some people like them to be, and that said idiots should not believe all the lies and propaganda that is produced on an industrial scale.

In other words, he is attempting the hardest task every teacher ever has, he is trying to make people think for themselves instead of just echoing groupthink.

It's a thankless task and probably a hopeless task, but I'm glad someone is at least trying.

Re: Debunking a myth

[Entrope]

Do you always spout such vapid drivel when you decide to avoid a question? It makes me suspect you're not really interested in thinking for yourself or addressing criticism -- only in name-calling and self-congratulation.

Re: Debunking a myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah yes, the old "I disagree with you because I'm a Christian and that couldn't possibly be true" troll moderation.

Remind me, was it Allah or God that the American military tried to force an atheist to swear allegiance to?

Was God and Freedom the key elements cited in the fight against the evil communist insurgents in Viet Nam? When Viet Nam fell, was it going to be the first in a series of collapses that took away your right to be Christian?

War, war, bloody war. You Christians, in spite of your self-promotion, are no better than the rest of us. You're not special, you're base, just like the rest of us.

Re:Debunking a myth

[hairyfeet]

He didn't write the rule you idiot, their prophet did and in case you haven't bothered to read the book or even learn a damned thing other than SJW political correctness (surprise surprise) they take what Mohammed said AS LAW, so yes Virginia a rule written by the prophet DOES take precedence over whatever bullshit your PC friends are shoveling.

In case you can actually read (that is if your PC beliefs don't make anything that isn't dogma verbotten) perhaps you should try educating yourself before you open you mouth, hmm? BTW you won't hear any of the "religion of peace" pushers mention this because it is holy to lie to non Muslims as long as it furthers the political goals of Sharia and Islam.

Re: Debunking a myth

[mellon]

I take exception to your claim that the rest of us are base (nor do I assert that all Christians are hypocrites—just the ones who actually are). But thank you for the thought! :)

Re:could never wrong. fast and furious, feds kille

[Anonymous Coward]

The false dichotomy is strong with this one.

Re:could never wrong. fast and furious, feds kille

[mellon]

Anarchy beats the crap out of misarchy. Personally I prefer democracy.

This

[transporter_ii]

Spend some time looking into the OKC bombing. That this was a sting gone wrong is incredibly possible. It doesn't have to be the way it happened, but certainly toward the top of the list of what really happened. There were government agents involved all over the place, and this has been proven in court. They either knew it was going to happen (possibly with their own involvement?) and thought they would stop him at the last minutes, or they knew about it but didn't have enough information as to when it was going to be, or they had government agents all through this group of people yet somehow didn't know about it. But several government agents that were undercover in the group have testified in court that they warned the FBI about a plan to blow up a federal building, so there is no way they didn't know about it to some degree before hand.

Let's say this time had went south and this guy was able to set off his bomb. Would the FBI admit they had been working with him? Or would they go into cover up mode...and everyone on here badmouth Alex Jones when he points out obvious holes in the official story? I actually can't stand Alex, but from time to time, a conspiracy theory turns out to be true.

Sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

Every single time I hear that a bombing has been prevented it ends up being the FBI tricking some moron.

patriot act biannual

[Anonymous Coward]

deba..., er, I mean rubber-stamping is due in june - purely coincidental I'm sure...

FTG

[AndyKron]

John Booker Jr. was probably fed up with all the bullshit the government is doing.

Idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

While I'm glad the feds nabbed him, he was a complete idiot for posting his stuff on Facebook. I mean, really.

if he was mentally ill, why didn't it end there?

[SuperBanana]

Why didn't the FBI say "this person is mentally ill", and simply get him mental health services? Oh, right. That doesn't get you commendations for "stopping a terrorist attack."

A Muslim cleric isn't a mental health counselor or psychologist. They're a religious leader.

fed Constitutional republic of enumerated powers

[raymorris]

Personally, I'd prefer a federal Consitutional republic in which the national government has enumerated powers. Let me break that down:
Federal: the people grant some power to their state, who in turn grant some power to the national union.
Consitutional: the role of government officials agreed upon ahead of time and written down. The congress and the president serve as written in the
Republic: citizens vote leaders
National enumerated powers: Washington handles certain things, like military defense, and anything not listed as Washington's job your state can tty it their way.

All of the above is what the Constitution and contemporary documents say the US should have. Notably, the national government was purposely NOT given the general police power, so the FBI really shouldn't exist without a Constitutional amendment authorizing the feds to police general crime.

wow. some of you are amazing

[WindBourne]

Here is a guy that says that he wants to attack America, and then goes on to plan it, including buying the goods and then finally down to the wire.
And yet, you say that he was entrapped. Seriously?

IF the FBI surrounded him with ppl that told him what to do and how to do it, and encouraged him, THAT IS ENTRAPMENT.
But, it remains to be seen as to whether that was the case. And to be fair, I suspect that the FBI KNOWS the difference between entrapment and simply following what a home-grown terrorists is up to.

Re:wow. some of you are amazing

[Howitzer86]

No kidding. There's even one guy that says

The worst he could really do is paint graffiti on the Post Office.

If that's not a failure of imagination, I don't know what is. Young, "powerless" people are the ones blowing things up.

Doing good by doing evil? WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

"What happens when one of their sting operations don't go according to plan?"

Something like the Boston Marathon. Oklahoma City. World Trade Center '93. Etc.

Jihad 101

[Anonymous Coward]

The moral of this story, for the up and coming Jihadis, is to act alone. The more people you involve in your dastardly plan the less likely it is to succeed.

Effectively, the FBI is simply showing our future problem children what not to do.

Re:islamist radical?

[Anonymous Coward]

You misspelled "fucking asshat".

I was an idiot when I was 20

[Anonymous Coward]

How about trying to help the guy out, rather than an FBI sting op and twenty years in jail?

It's just the jihad

[zapadnik]

Islamic jihad has been waged against non-Muslims *continuously* for 1400 years. Many Slashdotters don't seem to know this. Sometimes the jihad is violent, but sometime it is not and is just about slowly changing the culture in which Muslims are embedded so it gradually adopts Sharia (Islamic Law) tenets, such as never criticizing Islam nor Mohammed (the most evil man that ever lived), giving special treatment to Muslims, making non-Muslims adopt segregation of women. banning alcohol around mosques, and Sharia courts in Western countries (the UK has 87 operating Sharia courts - and these all discriminate against women, because Islamic Law does).

Since 9/11 (2001) there have been 25555 lethal jihad attacks. Most of the victims are fellow Muslims of a different sect, but plenty of Buddhist Thais, Chinese, Burmese, Iraqi Assyrians, Egyptian Copts, Jews of all nationalities, Nigerian Christians, etc are being persecuted and slaughtered on a daily basis. Here are the data
http://www.thereligionofpeace....
http://www.thereligionofpeace....

This is all part of the global jihad to fulfil Quran verse 9:5 and 9:29 (the last non-abrogated verses of the Quran, which mean they replace everything else in the Quran). These are commandments to take over the World. Here's a YouTube clip with some of the 1400 years of jihad laid out on a map of Europe:
"Why We Are Afraid, A 1400 Year Secret, by Dr Bill Warner" [45 mins]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Muslims (people) can be peaceful (but the more pious they are, the more violent they are to non-Muslims, gays, women etc) but Islam (the political ideology) never is peaceful. A recent analysis shows that the Islamic scriptures (Quran, hadith and Sira) have a higher proportion of hate-speech than Hitler's Mein Kampf does!

Fortunately Islam can be defeated without violence. How? because all it takes is for enough non-Muslims to understand that Islam is completely man-made and fictional, and (most importantly) we have archeological evidence and scholarship to prove it. There will be no more Islamic violence once enough non-Muslims understand that Islam is completely fake - and the Islamic narrative about Mohammed is not true. Islam is a political ideology invented by Caliph Abd al-Malik for political reasons (to cement his claim to the Arab Empire, and to counter the Christianity of the Byzantines, Zoroastrianism of the Persians, and Judaism of the Jews). Here is a discussion about the satellite evidence that shows the claims of Islam's origins cannot be true:
"An Historical Critique of Islam's Beginnings - Jay Smith" [72 mins]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

This would all be theoretical but unfortunately there are political forces in the West that are importing Muslims in massive numbers as they form a fast-breeding and reliable voting bloc for propping up socialist states that are in demographic decline. Since the doctrine of 'multiculturalism' (rather than the sane 'multiethnicism') means Muslims never have to assimilate into 21st Century Enlightenment Culture there are many Muslims who feel that it is their duty to fundamentally transform the society in which they live - and they doing so. The alliance between the political Far Left and Islam is causing devastation across the globe - and everyone can see it, no matter how hard the Left-leaning media now try to hide it.

We truly are in for a real World War, a fight to the death between 21st Century Enlightenment Civilization and Islamic totalitarianism. Fortunately we have the truth on our side, Islam is man-made. Unfortunately we have many corrupt and ideological Collectivist politicians and their media lapdogs against us. We're going to have to struggle to remain Free Societies in the coming century.

Caught using facebook

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen lots of people get themselves in trouble posting the wrong thing on Facebook. It didn't require an NSA dragnet to do it.

This seems likely to be an old-fashioned human-intelligence-based catch and sting operation. And it's not conclusive that he would have done this without assistance.

Tis a case for universal mental health care...

[niftymitch]

You apparently didn't comprehend the story. That guy was committed to make an attack and die in the process before he came into contact with the FBI. Where is your evidence that the FBI was "pressuring" and "reassuring him"?

In the article: "...stopped taking his medication because he didn't like the way it made him feel and it was expensive."
Now that is clearly a mandate for universal mental health care!

The modern pharmacopoeia of mental health drugs is better than many chemotherapy
strategies for cancer but not much better. Many are also too darn expensive.

Side effects need to to be understood and absolutely not understood is the effect
on a human when starting or quitting the program. Miss a couple doses and
a lot of individuals get untied.

The most difficult context "bipolar" seems to be involved here. A prescribing
doctor almost never sees a person in both manic and depressive states
outside of a locked facility. The transition triggers are ill understood.

It is the rare and exceptional program where a psychologist is trained
to and licensed to prescribe medication. The fees are astoundingly
high. As doctors they must all pay for insurance. As educated individuals
they have made a serious investment in time and money (debt) to become
trained and certified.

Statistics make the overlay of professionals and the population a sparse map
across much of the nation....

Decades ago it was noted that if you hire a programmer you must budget for
two so he or she has someone to talk to. This is true for psych professionals
they need continuous learning and a "community" to work with. In isolation
they seem to go a little bonkers.

Re:could never wrong. fast and furious, feds kille

[Anonymous Coward]

A federal sting could NEVER go wrong. It's not like the federal government (illegally) provides weapons to murderous drug cartels, who then use exactly those weapons to kill border patrol officers and others. Well okay, that could happen, but if it did, they'd immediately put a stop to the program. They wouldn't KEEP selling weapons to organized crime even knowing the weapons were being used to kill people in Texas. Well surely they'd stop when the information became public. The feds wouldn't send Eric Holder to go lie to Congress about the whole thing.

That's okay. Guns don't kill people, people kill people, so more guns isn't a problem, right?

Re:fed Constitutional republic of enumerated power

[Anonymous Coward]

Well if your main concern is strict adherence to the constitution, I certainly hope you haven't been voting for republicans.

Upvote the parent post!

[bensch128]

We should work with the Muslim community to help people who are at risk to become productive members of society.

This is the best post I've read in this entire thread so far.