Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
topsecretresearch

FBI Coercion The New Thing

20 posts in this topic

A Bridge Too Far

The informant, a longtime crook with 13 felony convictions, talked two of the defendants into buying the fake C-4, drove them around, nudged the plan along, hired three of them and — according to several sources close to the men — gave some of them illegal drugs. Meanwhile, he continued to commit crimes of his own.

Great article.

FBI stings, like one in Cleveland, become more common in terrorism investigations

So, did the agency's efforts prevent a heinous crime that could have sent scores of unsuspecting motorists plunging to their deaths, or did they help create a crime that never would have occurred without its help?

That woud be the latter.

"Presently, the prevailing kind of view in the public is that the war on terror is so important that we're going to condone aggressive government conduct," said Geoffrey Mearns, a former assistant U.S. Attorney who helped prosecute one of the Oklahoma City bombers. :no:

The truth is looking at the Cleveland case none of these kids would have done anything that drastic without an FBI informant aiding them on.

How FBI Entrapment Is Inventing 'Terrorists'

:no:

Shame on the USA for going down that slippery slope.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Presently, the prevailing kind of view in the public is that the war on terror is so important that we're going to condone aggressive government conduct," said Geoffrey Mearns, a former assistant U.S. Attorney who helped prosecute one of the Oklahoma City bombers. :no:

Is that really the prevailing view?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that "Entrapment", and I wonder,if it's "not that bad"I mean, they would also be easy targets for the terrorist recruitment team too,wouldn't they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd be funny if the flunkies in the Cleveland case found out the guy was an FBI informant with a long felony rap sheet and pushed him off the bridge and claimed he fell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Law enforcement has been this way for decades really. This is how the NYPD caught all the old Italian mafiosos .

They do drugs,kill people,and have affairs with women ,to make it all seem real,while their wife and kids are home hoping he's still alive .

It's a horrid way to live

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The government will take a massive dump on your opinions and create laws that give them the right to do what they please.

Welcome to 'Merica, proof is provided:

The unPatriot Act...

Note: I love my country, just not these unconstitutional laws the corrupt politicians keep making...

Edited by xFelix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: I love my country, just not these unconstitutional laws the corrupt politicians keep making...

I agree that we are living in a culture of corruption. That's the sad part. People are better than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Law enforcement has been this way for decades really. This is how the NYPD caught all the old Italian mafiosos .

They do drugs,kill people,and have affairs with women ,to make it all seem real,while their wife and kids are home hoping he's still alive .

It's a horrid way to live

Disagree. Things definitely changed with 9-11, homeland security and all that stuff. This is definitely a more agressive tactic employed by the Obama admin using the FBI. Of course now there is a political scandal invloving the FBI and the IRS where Obama has to hold a press conference and try to deny any invlovement. No surprise there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the entrapment argument to a point, but at the end of the day, these guys still wanted to blow up a bridge and acted on it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the entrapment argument to a point, but at the end of the day, these guys still wanted to blow up a bridge and acted on it.

Disagree. They wanted to blow up the bridge BECAUSE of the FBI informant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disagree. They wanted to blow up the bridge BECAUSE of the FBI informant.

So you're saying that these Occupy guys were just sitting around their tent smoking some cheeb while listening to a DMB bootleg and FBI guy just walks in and says "hey, ever thought of blowing up a bridge?"

bull****.

These guys had intent. They wanted to do this. The FBI informant just helped them along. As the article says, they were caught planting the bombs. At any time during the process they could have pulled out of the deal, but they didn't. They wanted to kill innocent men, women, and children.

Frankly, I'd like to shake the guy's hand that stopped these sick b*******.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're saying that these Occupy guys were just sitting around their tent smoking some cheeb while listening to a DMB bootleg and FBI guy just walks in and says "hey, ever thought of blowing up a bridge?"

bull****.

These guys had intent. They wanted to do this. The FBI informant just helped them along. As the article says, they were caught planting the bombs. At any time during the process they could have pulled out of the deal, but they didn't. They wanted to kill innocent men, women, and children.

Frankly, I'd like to shake the guy's hand that stopped these sick b*******.

Nope, you can not do that. People will say all sorts of things but most likely will not act on it. If a person has actually bought the bomb material on their own and are following through with a plan on their own then that merits action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's part of the freedom we all are supposed to enjoy.

You have a right to drop out of school and become a chain smoker.

You have a right to use foul lanquage or say something offensive.

You have the right to like Hitler or become a facist.

http://www.americanfascistmovement.com

You have the right as an American to become a member of the Communist party.

http://www.cpusa.org

You have the right to become an Anarchist.

http://americananarchy.org

You can join the Curch Of Scientology become a Mormon or worship Lucifer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhd-DsfVqfI

Freedom of Religion

You can say anything about the President and even use his image royalty free as long as it is not a death threat.

For Example: Obama sucks. He's an incompetent leader that needs to be impeached because of FBI scandals.

You can say screw the world, we need to take action and resort to violence. Unless you act on it it's only words.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@topsecretresearch

You also have the right to remain silent. :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Nope, you can not do that. People will say all sorts of things but most likely will not act on it. If a person has actually bought the bomb material on their own and are following through with a plan on their own then that merits action.

From the article:

The five men were arrested last Monday after the FBI said they placed the devices beneath the bridge that connects Brecksville and Sagamore Hills and tried to detonate them with cell phones.

They did it - helped or not. I don't know about you, but if some guy started talking to me telling me how I could blow up a bridge and kill a lot of people, there's no way in hell he could "convince" me to do it. Again, these guys had intent. They wanted to do this. It went well beyond a bunch of guys talking **** to each other.

Edited by Rafterman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you act on it it's only words.

Did you not even read your own articles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the article:

The five men were arrested last Monday after the FBI said they placed the devices beneath the bridge that connects Brecksville and Sagamore Hills and tried to detonate them with cell phones.

They did it - helped or not. I don't know about you, but if some guy started talking to me telling me how I could blow up a bridge and kill a lot of people, there's no way in hell he could "convince" me to do it. Again, these guys had intent. They wanted to do this. It went well beyond a bunch of guys talking **** to each other.

Nope, if they already purchased the bomb material and had plans to blow up a bridge that would be different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some big red flags:

"The informant, a 39-year-old con man, began working for the FBI last July when he was facing an indictment that would result in his 13th felony conviction."

That raises a red flag. The FBI informant = probably a drug addict. It becomes pretty obvious when he has to write bad checks even after being recruited. It makes you wonder how much FBI slime is out there.

Moving on...

The article goes on how anarchist Doug Wright seemed unaware how to create a bomb.

"The next day, the informant set the trap for the FBI's sting. He asked Wright if he'd rather buy explosives from someone the informant knew."

and

"On March 28, the informant was driving Wright and Baxter over I-480's Valley View Bridge..."

Note: It was the informants car. Without the informant the idea would have never came.

and

"On the floor, one agent laid out all the riot gear on Baxter and Wright's wish list: tear gas canisters, Israeli gas masks, smoke grenades and retractable batons, plus some ballistic vests and helmets. Next to the gear, the agent laid photographs of explosives."

You can stop there. The Occupy guys were losers.

There was no bomb making material and no pan to blow up a bridge before the FBI came along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to agree with Rafterman. Since the perps had no knowledge that they were under investigation by the FBI..that fact ALONE exhibits an intent to do harm. I mean really..If the intent was to do harm..what difference does it make as to how the harm would be accomplished and through what sources? Good call Rafterman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to agree with Rafterman. Since the perps had no knowledge that they were under investigation by the FBI..that fact ALONE exhibits an intent to do harm. I mean really..If the intent was to do harm..what difference does it make as to how the harm would be accomplished and through what sources? Good call Rafterman.

You can argue intent with a lot of people especially if you coecre them and give them everything they need to comit a crime.

America is just a f*d up country. It has the highest incarceration rate in the world. The National Debt is through the roof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.