Skip to main content

View Diary: BREAKING: Bomber in Plot on U.S. Airliner Is Said to Be a Double Agent (196 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  In one you have FBI informants who have been known (7+ / 0-)

    to induce people to do things they might not have otherwise and in this case you have a situation where the terrorists in question had a bomb and a plan and they just needed a person, someone almost incidental.  That person took the bomb and was never going to do anything.   As far as I'm concerned the two are worlds apart.

    There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

    by AoT on Tue May 08, 2012 at 07:45:07 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  You are making an assumption that the guy (0+ / 0-)

      wearing the explosive underwear, or planting the explosive under the bridge, is somehow less responsible, or having less initiative than the guy who is making or supplying bombs. That may be true for hierarchical organizations like Al-Qaeda. But for terror cells- they don't answer to any higher authority. The operational guy is generally also the mastermind.

      Also- do you have any proof that the FBI 'induced' anyone to do anything? If I promised to pay you $100,000 for putting a bomb under a bridge, that's inducement. If a beautiful woman promises to have sex with you for planting the bomb that's inducement.  If I talked you into planting the bomb in order to strike a blow against corporate fascism - that's not inducement. Because you derive no personal benefits from doing that act. You do it because you are amenable to an ideology of terrorism.

      •  From what I've read we know that this case (0+ / 0-)

        was part of a larger organization that the agent infiltrated and then betrayed.  That is fundamentally different than having an informer offer a "bomb" to people to blow something up while helping make the plans to do so.  There have been cases where the informant clearly took actions that would have been considered entrapment if it were a police officer doing the same thing, that's the major issue in a number of these domestic cases.  And I don't have any proof either way in the case of the recent attempted "bombing" of the bridge in Cleveland.  You might take the government's word for what happened but I'm skeptical about it until the full information comes out.  I'm not saying they weren't doing something wrong, because they clearly had violence planned, but having an informant incite them to do worse and then arrest them for it is horrible.

        Point taken about what constitutes inducement though.  I'll avoid using that word in the future.  Incitement would, I think, be the word I should have used.

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Wed May 09, 2012 at 11:50:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site