11

Does the FBI have: "Hero Syndrome"?

Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years, 10 months ago to Ask the Gulch
34 comments | Share | Flag

"Consider the case of Oregon college student Mohamed Osman Mohamud. He thought about using a car bomb to attack a well-attended, festive Christmas tree-lighting ceremony in Portland. The FBI gave him a van packed with inert explosives consisting of some real, but inactive, detonators and six 55-gallon drums, along with a gallon of diesel fuel. An FBI agent even drove the van. When Mohamud called the cell phone number that was supposed to trigger the explosion, nothing explosive happened, except that he got arrested."

"This isn’t some wild conspiracy theory like “the Russians hacked the election,” either. It’s a documented, widely-reported fact, even making the pages of the New York Times."

Is creating these events, then catching the bad guy they set up to be bad a ruse so the American public will think their great?

Is this so different from the guy that sets your house on fire only to run in a rescue you and become a Hero?

All Comments

  • Posted by rbroberg 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I disagree. I find it somewhat common among Gulchers to distrust both the known and unknown policies and procedures of governmental organizations. Perhaps this is the Rothbard presence in our lineage. Yet it seems to me that the terroristic intent of a suspected militant can be proved using objective criteria. Given this situation, we know the individual would act in similar fashion given a similar circumstance. This is not to say we attempt to confuse and coerce people into corners, but we use this as a means to prove what is already probable. Corporations do this to develop profiles for potential leaders.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Maybe I could lie to sorass, set something that just promotes really obvious stupid stuff while I use the balance to do the good stuff.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    What you are going to need, in that case, is a money man wealthy as Soros, and 20 to 30 years at the very least.Then, an organization that takes over the piblic schools, so the children are no longer being indoctrinated. That's, for the most part, how the libs have been doing it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    We have to get those that do wash to stop doing business with those that do not.
    Billboards, commercials, app's...etc
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If a mensch and behaved in an ethical honest manner these "coincidences" would be much more easily dismissed.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And, how do you get these laudable things distributed among the millions so that they adopt them?
    Carl, most persons in the Gulch know right from wrong but when you are talking to the great unwashed, it's a different ballgame.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The same thing that kept our country honest in the beginning...morality, honesty, honor and ethics; and they all came from the same place, the same book, the same teachings. Not out of fear or mystery but because it was the right thing to do.
    That is the mark of conscious men, (ladies read Humans).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "Who guards the guardians themselves?"
    So, in the here and now, knowing what you know of humanity, what is your solution?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I get the fact that someone approached by the FBI undercover and is convinced to do a crime then they are guilty for accepting, however, the FBI really has better things to do, like paying attention to those that have been reported or the one's they already suspect...in other words...DO THE JOB WE HIRED YOU FOR!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    While this wouldn't surprise me...I also think it sounds tinfoil-hattish. Don't get me wrong, though. It wouldn't surprise me...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yeah...well, I am very uncomfortable with these kind of activities being carried out by organizations like this. As my buddy used to say, "Who checks the checkers?" This, as I like to say, "Is very bad ju-ju."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Radio_Randy 7 years, 10 months ago
    My position is that if Mohamed is shopping for a car bomb and an FBI agent sets him up...it's Mohamed's problem. If the FBI approaches him, first, like Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge...it's totally inappropriate and Weaver should go free (like he did).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Don't you just love it? Crimes which have zero association with intent are now subject to intent yet those where intent is a crime in and above itself are not no longer good enough that we have to prove commission. The rule of law has been politicized and twisted. Equal protection under the law has been trampled.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    My point was that instead of arresting the one's that actually go for the big boom the FBI creates a problem so they can look like Hero's... making us think: Their on the Job; when how many times have we heard that these creatures have already been identified or reported, but nothing was done?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Agreed on both counts.

    I though suspicion or intent to commit a crime was punishable by law...save the recent comeyisms.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Why don't you say what you really think, Susanne...Laughing, love your descriptive language.

    No hearts bleeding for the "Juvenile-minded jerkoffs", My point was that instead of arresting the one's that actually go for the big boom the FBI creates a problem so they can look like Hero's... making us think: Their on the Job; when how many times have we heard that these "wastes-of-oxygen" have already been identified or reported, but nothing was done.
    That's my point in a nut shell.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 10 months ago
    Big difference. The guy who sets your house on fire does real damage, the guy in the FBI scenario does no damage, but proves the bad guy's intent. This is a well founded technique used by various law enforcement agencies for years. The bad rap that organizations such as the FBI, CIA, ATF, etc. get is generally because of poor leadership. Rivalry between agencies was encouraged and being a "cowboy" was rewarded. Hopefully that's changing. If not, then a shake-out of the alphabet agencies is needed. I don't think they can be eliminated in our current situation, but perhaps an elimination and consolidation is overdue.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 7 years, 10 months ago
    Like other government agencies, the FBI does occasionally do things right. When FDR declared that ALL Americans of Japanese descent be interred, J.Edgar Hoover, the FBI director, protested. The FBI had been monitoring Japanese Americans for a couple of years before Pearl Harbor, and had concluded that no more than a couple dozen were a real threat. Unfortunately, the President felt he had to carry out the infamous internment, partly to protect our Japanese citizens from hostile acts, but mostly to satisfy a panicked American citizenry. Hoover also protested sweeps to inter German and Italian American citizens, and did have better success at limiting those to recent arrivals and identified possible spies.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 10 months ago
    What they're doing is all a matter of the laws: the penalties for "intent" are minor while the actual commission is only what gets them locked away for a long time. If the penalties for the intent (difficult to prove, btw) were harsher the FBI probably wouldn't resort to setting up these jihadist idiots just to get them put behind bars for a long time.

    Of course, one can also blame the gutting of the death penalty. Studies show that the disincentive of execution is a significant deterrent to crimes carrying that penalty. (It's also a complete and utter waste of time and money to have someone spend 30 years on death row.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by evlwhtguy 7 years, 10 months ago
    The FBI is just trying to justify their existence...they have been creating crime to solve for a long time...Situations like ruby Ridge come to mind...[Although I believe that was the ATF] One of the biggest BS stories they told was early on with the Nazi saboteur case in WW2. The FBI claimed to have solved this case on their own...but in fact one of the saboteurs [who was an american of German decent caught in Germany when the war started] never wanted to be a saboteur and walked in to an FBI office ratted the other ones out. They all got executed, except the informant and his direct partner and the FBI was proclaimed war heroes.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo