Strange way to charge/arrest people

[Kanaric]

http://www.cnn.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amine_El_Khalifi


So this man gets with FBI undercover officers tells them, assuming they are terrorist sympathizers, that he wants to do a terrorist attack sot hey arm him with a disarmed suicide weapon to attack DC? Why do they go about solving crime this way this is insane. He wants to do something illegal and they provided him with the (fake) equipment to carry it out to charge him with more? Sounds odd charging someone with a crime when they were given all the opportunity by our own government.

Isn't this entrapment or something along those lines?

[Mekhlis]

http://www.cnn.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amine_El_Khalifi


So this man gets with FBI undercover officers tells them, assuming they are terrorist sympathizers, that he wants to do a terrorist attack sot hey arm him with a disarmed suicide weapon to attack DC? Why do they go about solving crime this way this is insane. He wants to do something illegal and they provided him with the (fake) equipment to carry it out to charge him with more? Sounds odd charging someone with a crime when they were given all the opportunity by our own government.

Isn't this entrapment or something along those lines?

While I don't make a habit of supporting America's fascist security bloc, this method is sound in that you can weed out the potential terrorists from the bluffers and the people who are just being hyperbolic. I mean, if a person is terrorist material, then they would go the whole way with the plan. If someone is speaking out of bravado, then they will not actually go and try to carry out an attack.

[nein]

the only terrorists who get through the security net are state sanctioned ones, who have neat holes cut for them. Guys like this do not stand a chance and will be ruthlessly run down

[Phier]

In criminal law, entrapment is conduct by a law enforcement agent inducing a person to commit an offense that the person would otherwise have been unlikely to commit.[1] In many jurisdictions, entrapment is a possible defense against criminal liability. However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informant or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person (see sting operation). So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.
On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime had it not been for inducement or persuasion on the part of some government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty. For example, if a defendant had purchased illegal drugs from an undercover officer, he may be found not guilty if it is determined that the officer initiated the transaction or aggressively pressed the accused to complete it.
Entrapment holds if all three conditions are fulfilled:

1. The idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
2. Government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving someone the opportunity to commit a crime is not the same as persuading them to commit that crime.
3. The person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before interaction with the government agents.

Depending on the law in the jurisdiction, the prosecution may be required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped or the defendant may be required to prove that he was entrapped as an affirmative defense.

By January 2011, El Khalifi was under federal surveillance.[1][3] At a meeting in an Arlington residence he agreed when someone stated that the "war on terrorism" was a "war on Muslims," according to an informant.[1][2][3] El Khalifi watched as the man produced an AK-47 rifle, two revolvers and ammunition, and discussed being ready to "fight back".[4]
El Khalifi allegedly expressed a desire to be "associated with an armed extremist group."[1] In December 2011, he was introduced to "Yusaf", an undercover officer. El Khalifi allegedly told Yusaf that he wanted to carry out a mass shooting at a Washington DC restaurant frequented by military officers.[1] He allegedly wanted to kill at least 30 people and was also considering targeting an office building in Alexandria, a restaurant, or a synagogue.[5] He is said to have expressed interest in gunning people down "face-to-face."[6]
On January 7, 2012, El Khalifi discussed a larger attack on a military facility.[6] On January 15, El Khalifi changed his plan, allegedly telling under cover officers that he now wanted to carry out a suicide bombing.[1] That same day he is said to have carried out a test with a cellphone detonation device.[1] When the test was successful, he expressed a desire for larger explosives, enough to blow up a building.[1][5] He selected February 17 as the day for his attack.[6] He visited DC several times over the following weeks to plan his attack and purchased supplies, such as nails, for his operation.[2][5] He asked for a gun to shoot anyone who tried to interfere with his "martyrdom operation" and request remote detonation of the bomb in the event he was captured.[6]
On February 17, El Khalifi went to the Dar Al-Hijrah Islamic Center to pray before embarking on a suicide mission.[1] Authorities say he was "not a regular" at that mosque or any other in the area.[5] The mosque's imam offered to provide authorities with surveillance footage, but was told it was not necessary.[5] Later that day, El Khalifi was provided a disarmed suicide vest and MAC-10 by Yusaf and transported to downtown Washington.[1][6] He was arrested before he exited the parking building he had been dropped off in, as he walked alone toward the Capitol building.[5] After the arrest, authorities raided his west Alexandria residence and searched his property.[6] "There is no doubt that this guy was committed," commented a law enforcement officer.[1]
El Khalifi appeared in court that afternoon and was charged with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction against US property.[6] An attorney for the government stated "El Khalifi ... devised the plot, the targets and the methods on his own."[6] A bail hearing was set for February 22.[2] He was unemployed at the time of arrest and is not believed to have a genuine association with al-Qaeda.[5] Authorities say they are close to arresting an associate of El Khalifi's on unrelated charges.[5] "Today’s case underscores the continuing threat we face from homegrown violent extremists," remarked Assistant Attorney General Lisa Monaco. "Thanks to a coordinated law enforcement effort, El Khalifi’s alleged plot was thwarted before anyone was harmed."[7]

Not sure how that would be entrapment, unless they FBI basically brow beat him into doing it, which we have no evidence of.

[mongrel]

While I don't make a habit of supporting America's fascist security bloc, this method is sound in that you can weed out the potential terrorists from the bluffers and the people who are just being hyperbolic. I mean, if a person is terrorist material, then they would go the whole way with the plan. If someone is speaking out of bravado, then they will not actually go and try to carry out an attack.

Not just confined to Four Lions wannabees. Any unthinking American could be susceptible to such tactics, oh dear it's already happened.

[Inconsistent]

Can you post a source that isn't RT?

[Mekhlis]

Not just confined to Four Lions wannabees. Any unthinking American could be susceptible to such tactics, oh dear it's already happened.

Waht? I seriously doubt 'any unthinking American' would become a potential terrorists just because they are being pulled in that direction by the FBI. To become a terrorist willing to kill many others while definitely losing your life isn't a decision that most people would take. Especially not against their own society.

As for the video; suffice to say I can't watch it because of slow internet speeds.

Can you post a source that isn't RT?

OH NO, ANTI-WESTERN OPINIONZ/SAUCES!!1!

[Vanoi]

OH NO, ANTI-WESTERN OPINIONZ/SAUCES!!1!

Sorry, but RT is a source. Reporters Without Borders agree with me. BBC would be better.

[Thorn777]

Sorry, but RT is a source. Reporters Without Borders agree with me. BBC would be better.

Actually it agrees with you on Russia, the nation, not RT. But I suppose its the same thing.

[Mekhlis]

Sorry, but RT is a source. Reporters Without Borders agree with me. BBC would be better.

Yeah, I've heard it all before. It's biased, conspiratorial, has low-standards; so does Fox. Anyway, RT isn't that bad, it's actually quite insightful but a lot of people have already made up their minds without seeing it.

That's correct. More objective sources are better. Heavily agenda driven stations are going to report things based on.. an agenda.

Agenda driven? you mean like the populist, profit motivated agendas of Western media?

[Admiral Piett]

OH NO, ANTI-WESTERN OPINIONZ/SAUCES!!1!

That's correct. More objective sources are better. Heavily agenda driven stations are going to report things based on.. an agenda.

[Inconsistent]

If it was his idea, then in no way was it entrapment.

[Farnan]

Just talking about a desire to commit terrorist attacks isn't illegal. Attempting to commit them is (even if the equipment was disarmed).

[Kanaric]

Just talking about a desire to commit terrorist attacks isn't illegal. Attempting to commit them is (even if the equipment was disarmed).

The thing is the FBI led him to the (fake) means. People shouldn't be arrested or charged when the government is providing the incentive. Maybe he would have failed and given up and changed his outlook on what he should be doing in life? Anything is possible.

[Farnan]

The thing is the FBI led him to the (fake) means. People shouldn't be arrested or charged when the government is providing the incentive. Maybe he would have failed and given up and changed his outlook on what he should be doing in life? Anything is possible.

They didn't provide him the incentive just the means.

From what we see near that was the FBI this time but if anyone gave him the means or he saved up to buy a rifle or handgun he would have attempted the attack and the results would be different.

I have no problem with this tactic. Now if they would have gave him the idea to cause violence against the US or urged him on that would be different.

[Yoda Twin]

They didn't provide him the incentive just the means.

From what we see near that was the FBI this time but if anyone gave him the means or he saved up to buy a rifle or handgun he would have attempted the attack and the results would be different.

I have no problem with this tactic. Now if they would have gave him the idea to cause violence against the US or urged him on that would be different.

In regards to weiving out terrorists and their partners, I have no problem with, as there's clearly no entrapment involved. What I do have a roblem with however, is the potential damage, either mental or physical that could occur to the citizens on the other end of the attack. They don't know that the attack will never work, as such they could for a period of time being going through incredible turmoil as they believe that their life is ocming to an end.


Here's a link to a testimony of an attorney who was the recieving end of one of these attacks, if i was ever in a similar positionl, I could definately see myself losing faith in my government.

http://theintelhub.com/2012/02/16/br...er-sentencing/

[mrmouth]

I have no problem with this tactic.

The only people who do, have a clear agenda. It's beyond old, and totally nonsensical. Time would be better spent addressing the fundamental problems that lead to this.

Just another victim complex.

[Phier]

RT as a source reminds me of when people don't know the onion is satire.

[Simon Cashmere]

http://www.cnn.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amine_El_Khalifi


So this man gets with FBI undercover officers tells them, assuming they are terrorist sympathizers, that he wants to do a terrorist attack sot hey arm him with a disarmed suicide weapon to attack DC? Why do they go about solving crime this way this is insane. He wants to do something illegal and they provided him with the (fake) equipment to carry it out to charge him with more? Sounds odd charging someone with a crime when they were given all the opportunity by our own government.

Isn't this entrapment or something along those lines?

No. Because normal people do not agree to participate in terrorist plots, no matter who is asking.

That's only what traitors would do.

[DannyTh3Man]

They provided Khalifi with the equipment to see if he was either someone who had "terrorist thoughts" or a serious threat who is actively working against the United States.
And RT is a miserable source for objective news