“It would certainly be inappropriate for an FBI undercover agent or cooperating witness to provoke or inspire or urge a person to commit an act of violence”
Further quote, “Not that that will stop us. We got budgets to maintain and ideology to enforce…blah-blah-blah…USA-USA-USA!!!”
Isn’t this common, the whole “FBI sting gone wrong” scenario? Wasn’t that a thing with Timothy McVeigh and the OK City Fed building bombing? I’ve always thought that the “real” 9/11 conspiracy might be along similar lines, if there is one – just another sting opp went off the rails.
Of course not, that takes hard work.
Or the ISF (ISE)…
Perhaps I didn’t make this clear enough: my displeasure is with the fact that the FBI is wasting their time coaching terrorists(thankfully, the guy in this case was shot to death before he managed to hurt anybody; but given that he had superior weaponry and the element of surprise, that was very much not assured) not with the theory that the guy they coached in this case was a poor innocent victim.
If somebody is sufficiently incompetent or under-motivated that they can’t pull anything off without a team of FBI agents to hold their hands; then the FBI shouldn’t be wasting their time on handholding just so they can hold up some trophies later.
If somebody is potentially dangerous, having the FBI encouraging them seems like a terrible plan; tantamount to a willingness on the FBI’s part to use us as bait.
I’m just fine with what happened to the shooter in this case; a trial would have been nice but a clear-cut self defense shooting is OK by me; I am not fine with what the FBI is up to.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
