NYPD: Bombers "Wanted To Commit Jihad." Really?
| Thu May. 21, 2009 9:20 AM PDT
The four men arrested in the Bronx Wednesday night "wanted to commit jihad," New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters. Certainly that appears to be the case. The unarmed men, taken into custody after a dramatic scene during which police blocked their escape with a 18-wheeler and smashed the windows of their SUV, stand accused of plotting to blow up two religious centers and using stinger missiles to down US military aircraft at an Air National Guard base. The arrests came after the would-be terrorists placed what they believed to be 37 pounds of C4 in the trunk of a car outside Riverdale Temple and planting two other bombs at the Riverdale Jewish Center. But as it turns out, the bombs were fakes, given to the plotters by an FBI informant, as were the stinger missiles they obtained from the same source.
The case calls to mind earlier foiled plots. Remember the Lackawanna Six? The Fort Dix Six? In both instances, as in many others, the men arrested appear to have been lured in by FBI informants feigning outrage at the US foreign policy and offering to obtain weapons for terror attacks on American soil. In all cases, there's little question that those arrested ultimately plotted (however ineffectively) to commit acts of terrorism. But would they have done so without encouragement from FBI informants? In other words, is this an instance of effective policing? Or maybe entrapment by an imaginative, but overzealous FBI? Too little is known about Wednesday's arrests to say one way or the other. But it may be worth your while to read a Eric Urmansky's February 2008 piece in Mother Jones, in which he explores the concept of "material support" for terrorism, and wonders if we are in effect criminalizing thought by leading disaffected young men along a path they might not otherwise have chosen.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
NYPD: Bombers "Wanted To Commit Jihad." Really?
Submitted by Dredd (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 11:39 AM PDT.
Meanwhile, 450,000 Americans are killed each year, according to JAMA, by "iotragenic" causes ... doctors burying their mistakes.
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/01/why-do-we-call-it-health-care.html
The War on Terror is like The War of Drugs. A lot of play-pretend with far less substance.
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-is-americas-greatest-enemy.html
Thought police
Submitted by smitisan on Thu May. 21, 2009 11:40 AM PDT.
So these guys are arrested for thinking they're doing something rather than actually doing it. And Iraq is bombed back into the Stone Age for what we thought they were thinking. Where's the tipping point on this slippery slope?
"You signed the papers. You wanted to be here!" -Drill Sgt. Leach, 1971
Nothing To See Here..., Move Along Folks...
Submitted by Nothing New (not verified) on Thu May. 21, 2009 1:55 PM PDT.
This sort of entrapment of "terrorists" is nothing new, and it didn't start with Dubya's declaration of War on Terrorizers either.
Read up on Randy Weaver / Ruby Ridge and see how they set up a family who's main threat to America was that they had oddball religious beliefs, and wanted to be left-the-hell-alone.
Responsibility
Submitted by Pondering (not verified) on Fri May. 22, 2009 1:05 AM PDT.
The act of attempting to terrorize is all that is important. If someone would have tried to convince them to blow their brains out would they have? If not then they have no excuse. None of those mentioned in the article convicted after contact with police chose to keep their anger toward this country within the limits of the law. If they have the capacity to know right from wrong (to not commit terrorist acts is so obvious) and show that they are willing to commit the act than send them to jail. The US convicts people all the time for thought crimes, look how many Hate Crimes we hear about which add to sentences handed out which by themselves are protected speech. Let us demand responsibility rather than quibbling about entrapment when they had every opportunity to reject doing wrong.
NYPD: Bombers "Wanted To Commit Jihad." Really?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun May. 24, 2009 5:29 AM PDT.
If someone is suicidal, you should place him or her on suicide watch. Any thing they can use to kill themselves and anyone else is taken from them. If while caring for a patient on suicide watch, one gives them a gun and uses them as a means to attempt to kill some one, that person would be criminal. It is easy to find unstable people if you are in the business of creating, recruiting, and supplying them with weapons.
Responsibility all around
Submitted by Matthew Kaney (not verified) on Fri May. 22, 2009 3:33 AM PDT.
I don't think that there is a huge question about whether or not these men are guilty of commit acts outside the law. For that, they bear responsibility. However, the issue of entrapment remains important because that is a factor in determining how we react to this incident. At any point in our history, a small group could probably be easily found and incited to commit a violent act.
For law enforcement and politicians to use this an example of the increased risk of homegrown terrorism in our time, particularly for the purpose of passing legislation restricting civil liberties, is equally irresponsible.
Could Cheney be right?
Submitted by DaveD (not verified) on Fri May. 22, 2009 3:54 AM PDT.
Hmmmmm. Cheney claims that only through the use of torture is our government able to protect us from terrorists. Since it appears that our police agencies are only able to protect us from terrorists that they create, perhaps he is correct.
War On Terror
Submitted by The Peoples Program (not verified) on Fri May. 22, 2009 6:13 AM PDT.
My appreciation goes out to the agents who foiled this plot. They can't be given enough credit.
As for the war on terror it continues to be a success and on track, even if Obama thinks that we lost our way.
Just like the Liberty City Six...
Submitted by Godless Heathen on Sat May. 23, 2009 1:41 PM PDT.
Find a bunch of helpless pissed off guys and offer to help them. No doubt these men are guilty of trying to do something wrong, but aren't we doing this backwards? Shouldn't we be pretending to be pissed off and helpless so we can find out who else has access to bombs and missiles? It seems like it should be a little harder to have explosives than to want them, thereby making the suppliers less numerous (easier to eradicate) and more important (can't blow up a building without a bomb).
The act of attempting to
Submitted by louis vuitton replica (not verified) on Mon Aug. 3, 2009 3:53 AM PDT.
The act of attempting to terrorize is all that is important. If someone would have tried to convince them to blow their brains out would they have? If not then they have no excuse. None of those mentioned in the article convicted after contact with police chose to keep their anger toward this country within the limits of the law. If they have the capacity to know right from wrong (to not commit terrorist acts is so obvious) and show that they are willing to commit the act than send them to tiffany jewelry
tiffany and co
jail. The US convicts people all the time for thought crimes, look how many Hate Crimes we hear about which add to sentences handed out which by themselves are protected speech. Let us demand responsibility rather than quibbling about entrapment when they had every opportunity to reject doing wrong.
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
