• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

the FBI Tried To Lure Him Into a Terror Plot

K

katsung47

Banned
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Messages
879
Reaction score
128
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
As usual, it was a set up?

Before Omar Mateen Committed Mass Murder, the FBI Tried To Lure Him Into a Terror Plot


New revelations raise questions about the FBI’s role in shaping Mateen’s lethal mindset.


By Max Blumenthal, Sarah Lazare / AlterNet June 19, 201


after Mateen threatened a courthouse deputy in 2013 by claiming he could order Al Qaeda operatives to kill his family, the FBI dispatched an informant to "lure Omar into some kind of act and Omar did not bite."
Click to expand...


Before Omar Mateen Committed Mass Murder, the FBI Tried To Lure Him Into a Terror Plot | Alternet
 
I've never agreed with the idea of agent provocateurs.

It's one thing to observe covertly someone you suspect of crime or terrorism.

But trying to encourage and lure someone into bad acts?

Why should this be considered a valid tool of security forces?

How many people have been convinced to take action in ways they may never have without such "encouragement?"

IMO agent provocateurs are co-conspirators and should be held as accountable as those they've enticed to wrongful action.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
What should be troubing you is that (terroistic threat?) did not result in a criminal convicton. Why was that case not persued?
Click to expand...

In katsung's world, every perceived law enforcement misstep is part of a grand gov't conspiracy.
Usually these conspiracies are directed at eliminating katsung.
If you go to the conspiracy section---where this thread is headed btw----you can read more of k-man's stuff.
 
radioman said:
In katsung's world, every perceived law enforcement misstep is part of a grand gov't conspiracy.
Usually these conspiracies are directed at eliminating katsung.
If you go to the conspiracy section---where this thread is headed btw----you can read more of k-man's stuff.
Click to expand...

Yep, but why step over a dollar to pick up a dime? ;)
 
katsung47 said:
As usual, it was a set up?




Before Omar Mateen Committed Mass Murder, the FBI Tried To Lure Him Into a Terror Plot | Alternet
Click to expand...

This makes me curious, I wouldn't say its definitive or anything. Like to what extent was it a hostile work environment. Was he harassed daily? Orlando isn't a liberal utopia of tolerant peoples... It is a pretty mixed bag.

But also, if he worked in such a nice community full of riches. And the courthouse, why did he target a gay club. If this was religiously/politically motivated? Either of those targets would stir the pot decidedly more. And would give a chance to face those harassing him. Instead he chooses a group of people, that is being ostracized by society. After publicly declaring allegiance to opposing factions, he has no direct ties to whatsoever.

Could he be trying to get bigots to defend a group of people they normally exclude? While at the same time showing everyone that you can harass a man so far til you make him into what you think he is?

For once I wish there was some sort of manifesto, you know that is the most telling I think. The real believers all have a flipping manifesto. Plus Big Brother can usually establish links to bad guys through his internet traffic by this point, they looked to see if he was gay, but not connected to extremists? So how was he getting his messages? Through our news? Are they using our own media against us?

Like I said this makes me more curious, and everything less definitive. I wouldn't say the FBI targeting him is what pushed him, I would expect them to set up a sting. That is catch a bad guy 101. We have no proof? Set up a sting! Sting didn't work? This guy checks out, for now... The fact they left him alone after the sting didn't work says the FBI wasn't trying to nail him by above and beyond means. It's the FBI, if they want you they don't tend to stop.
 
Captain Adverse said:
I've never agreed with the idea of agent provocateurs.

It's one thing to observe covertly someone you suspect of crime or terrorism.

But trying to encourage and lure someone into bad acts?

Why should this be considered a valid tool of security forces?

How many people have been convinced to take action in ways they may never have without such "encouragement?"

IMO agent provocateurs are co-conspirators and should be held as accountable as those they've enticed to wrongful action.
Click to expand...

Precisely, what the scholastics called "active scandal" should, if done in respect to criminal activity, be a criminal offense for anyone, including law enforcement.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Has someone wandered off the ranch?
Click to expand...

Off the ranch is where we belong.

On the ranch, the ranchers are our government overlords... and we the cattle.


Ever see "V for Vendetta"??
 
Captain Adverse said:
I've never agreed with the idea of agent provocateurs.

It's one thing to observe covertly someone you suspect of crime or terrorism.

But trying to encourage and lure someone into bad acts?

Why should this be considered a valid tool of security forces?

How many people have been convinced to take action in ways they may never have without such "encouragement?"

IMO agent provocateurs are co-conspirators and should be held as accountable as those they've enticed to wrongful action.
Click to expand...

I agree. They're basically doing the exact same thing groomers do, to acclimate otherwise normal people into things they would never normally do. They're just doing it in some mistaken attempt to get a successful arrest to their name, rather than to convert someone to a cause.

While I think we can say with fair certainty that Mateen was never a totally normal person, we can also say with certainty that the majority of people can be groomed in this way. If anything, someone like Mateen would be even more vulnerable than a normal person. It's an unfortunate vulnerability of the human mind. The price of us being so socially flexible and plastic is that, sometimes, we flex into attrocity if we are given sufficient social encouragement to do so. This is why things like Nazi Germany are possible. And the US government itself has extensively studied this phenomenon, so they certainly know perfectly well of this vulnerability in people (look into the shock administration experiments of the 50's -- it's amazing how quickly normal people can be convinced to do horrible things).

I don't think it's completely unfair to say the FBI, in trying to bait him into entrapment, may have accidentally groomed him in such a way that he was more likely to commit violence. And this raises serious questions about the way our government behaves in the name of "protecting from terror." They're doing things that we know perfectly well may actually cause a vulnerable person to be more likely to become a terrorist when they may not otherwise have done.
 
Last edited:
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I agree. They're basically doing the exact same thing groomers do, to acclimate otherwise normal people into things they would never normally do. They're just doing it in some mistaken attempt to get a successful arrest to their name, rather than to convert someone to a cause.

While I think we can say with fair certainty that Mateen was never a totally normal person, we can also say with certainty that the majority of people can be groomed in this way. If anything, someone like Mateen would be even more vulnerable than a normal person. It's an unfortunate vulnerability of the human mind. The price of us being so socially flexible and plastic is that, sometimes, we flex into attrocity if we are given sufficient social encouragement to do so. This is why things like Nazi Germany are possible. And the US government itself has extensively studied this phenomenon, so they certainly know perfectly well of this vulnerability in people (look into the shock administration experiments of the 50's -- it's amazing how quickly normal people can be convinced to do horrible things).

I don't think it's completely unfair to say the FBI, in trying to bait him into entrapment, may have accidentally groomed him in such a way that he was more likely to commit violence. And this raises serious questions about the way our government behaves in the name of "protecting from terror." They're doing things that we know perfectly well may actually cause a vulnerable person to be more likely to become a terrorist when they may not otherwise have done.
Click to expand...

The more i learn about this, the more convinced i become that the FBI are either staggeringly incompetent or actually orchestrated the massacre. Wouldn't surprise me if they taught the killer everything he needed
 
Captain Adverse said:
I've never agreed with the idea of agent provocateurs.

It's one thing to observe covertly someone you suspect of crime or terrorism.

But trying to encourage and lure someone into bad acts?

IMO agent provocateurs are co-conspirators and should be held as accountable as those they've enticed to wrongful action.
Click to expand...

Though I would not go so far as your last point, I agree with you that such agents give rise to alot of concerns.

Then factor in that nearly all of these informants were only marginally employed before their new careeers as paid informants. They can only stay employed as an informant if they find bad guys to investigate. Ergo, there is alot of financial pressure to find- and if they cannot be found, to create bad guys.

ttwtt78640 said:
What should be troubing you is that (terroistic threat?) did not result in a criminal convicton. Why was that case not persued?
Click to expand...
Probably for the same reasons that purely domestic right wingers in the far west are known to make alot of death threats (all hypothetical of course) against Land Management officials, IRS agents, ATF agents etc., yet are rarely proscecuted for threats alone. Ditto for Black Nationalists making death threats against local police. At the end of the day, Freedom of Speech is broadly defined.
chromium said:
The more i learn about this, the more convinced i become that the FBI are either staggeringly incompetent or actually orchestrated the massacre. Wouldn't surprise me if they taught the killer everything he needed
Click to expand...
The FBI neither orchestrated it (nor is Obama going to allow UN troopers to establish secret bases in the National Forests- and then fly black helicopters out of them), nor is the FBI incompetent.

Rather, they operate in a democratic society where it is very hard to arrest people for things that they might do.
 
Last edited:
chromium said:
The more i learn about this, the more convinced i become that the FBI are either staggeringly incompetent or actually orchestrated the massacre. Wouldn't surprise me if they taught the killer everything he needed
Click to expand...

:roll:

Sure they did:roll::roll::roll:
 
Captain Adverse said:
I've never agreed with the idea of agent provocateurs.

It's one thing to observe covertly someone you suspect of crime or terrorism.

But trying to encourage and lure someone into bad acts?

Why should this be considered a valid tool of security forces?

How many people have been convinced to take action in ways they may never have without such "encouragement?"

IMO agent provocateurs are co-conspirators and should be held as accountable as those they've enticed to wrongful action.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, what you describe has become standard fare for the FBI in bringing and prosecuting terror cases. They prey on the downtrodden, and entice them with fame, however perverse.

It may have begun with DeLorean, but he had the financial wherewithal to fight it successfully. In this post-911 world the juries are easily swayed by claims of terrorism, no matter how artificial they may be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom