9 ms·

FBI's “imperfect entrapment” of teen may lead to FAA challenge

109 points by BDGC 11y ago

xemoka 11y ago
This doesn't just happen in the US. Here in Canada a seemingly similar instance occurred: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-legislature-bomb-plotters-entrapment-claims-hard-to-prove-1.3098654 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-legislatu... http://www.citynews.ca/2015/09/17/lawyers-in-b-c-court-argue-for-access-to-secret-documents-from-spy-agency/ http://www.citynews.ca/2015/09/17/lawyers-in-b-c-court-argue...
hackaflocka 11y ago
Anyone have details on how Mohamed Osman Mohamud's family came to the U.S.? Were they refugees? (He was born in Somalia.) Carrots and Sticks: The U.S. is great at giving individuals carrots. It needs to start giving individuals sticks. This teen's family should be stripped of their citizenship and sent back to Somalia. Reason: this kid probably learned at least some of his hatred for the U.S. at the dinner table. Edit: I'm a foreigner myself in the U.S. myself. And I love the U.S.
- scintill76 11y ago
  > The family fled to America. Mohamud’s father, Osman Mohamud Barre, went first, quitting his engineering professorship at Somali National University. Mohamud stayed behind, spending a year in a Kenyan refugee camp with his mother, Mariam Hassan. > The U.S. granted Barre refugee status. He settled in Hillsboro, Oregon, where he worked 13 hours a day at an Intel assembly line. By 1993, he had saved enough money to bring his family to the U.S. “They were malnourished and suffering, but they were happy,” Barre later testified at his son’s trial. “We were grateful to America.” -- Above quote is from the article > This teen's family should be stripped of their citizenship and sent back to Somalia. Reason: this kid probably learned at least some of his hatred for the U.S. at the dinner table. Yeah, and the families of felons should be put in prison too, since the felons probably learned their hatred for society and the law at the dinner table. /sarcasm
  - hackaflocka 11y ago
    It's kind of like the difference between helping your own family and a stranger. If I take a stranger in, I will throw him/her out if they do unacceptable things. With family, I may not throw them out. Refugees etc. are not born in the U.S. = strangers. U.S. citizens born here = family.
    - user_0001 11y ago
      Why stop there? Anyone without family dating back say, more than 600 years - back to country to origin?
    - scintill76 11y ago
      Setting aside your opinion on the transitive property of criminality, refugees probably do have some sorts of probationary legal status.. until they become citizens. It is apparently possible to be denaturalized[0], but it's not taken lightly. I guess you could argue for a new half-citizen class for refugees, or that refugees shouldn't be granted citizenship, but those would be too late to affect how this family has a legal right to be treated. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_c...
    - mikeash 11y ago
      That's an argument for deporting non-citizens who commit major crimes. And guess what? That's what we often do! But none of this is an argument for deporting or otherwise punishing the families of non-citizens who commit major crimes. How could you possibly justify that?
- bobwaycott 11y ago
  All you had to do was read to find out about the family. There are several grafs devoted to the family's history and its surmised impact on Mohamud. And yeah, let's definitely start stripping entire families of citizenship because of something a member of their family does, or for not being good enough country-lovers. What could possibly go wrong?
  - hackaflocka 11y ago
    Liberal hand-wringing.
    - drdeca 11y ago
      I don't think this comment contributes all that much. "Liberal hand-wringing" is I think largely (though, not entirely) an expression of sentiment, not an expression of fact. (similar phrases about other places in the political "spectrum" would be similar in this regard. My comment is about the type of comment, not about the specifics of liberal vs somethingotherthanliberal). The "liberal" part is contentful enough I guess, but it doesn't really add much to the conversation, because any comment which is disagreeing with a comment that is meant to defend, e.g., muslim immigrants or w/e could be expected to, most of the time, consider the post they are responding to, to be too liberal (again, similarly, this could be reflected partywise. I'm not making a point about specific parties). The hand-wringing, I think, suggests, I guess, worrying too much about something, or, trying too hard to be seen as being concerned about something? one part of this is the "too much", and, the phrase is just, generally a disparaging phrase. But, accusing the comment one is responding to, of being just for posturing, doesn't really seem like something that contributes all that much? I mean, sure, it could be true, but isn't more important than the motivations of what is said, the accuracy or validity of what is said? Also, the ambiguity of the meaning of calling something "hand-wringing" I think also reduced the content of it. If someone says "No, that technically isn't liberal-handwringing", what would they be saying? If it doesn't mean much to dispute a statement, then it doesn't mean much to make the statement. So, generally, I think your comment that this comment is a reply to, is almost without content.
    - dang 11y ago
- btym 11y ago
  If you had read the article at all, you would know that Mohamud's parents sacrificed a lot to give him the opportunity of a fulfilling life. I find it hard to believe that he learned such hate from people who raised him with such love.
  - ern 11y ago
    Your point of view is rather charitable. His parents neglected to give him much of a moral foundation. Home-grown jihadists in the West seem to have a common story: parents move to the West, kid develops an identity crisis. Kid has no clue about religion, so looks to the Internet or local charismatic figure, and gets some form of salafist jihadism. Becomes radicalized and plans, or perpetrates an act of violence. Parents have a responsibility to ensure that their kids know that blowing people up is not acceptable. I don't think he learned hate from them, but there is an element of neglect on their part.
- theworstshill 11y ago
  If he did, unless it can be proven in a court of law do you really think collective punishment would help justice in this case? Do I think he was entrapped? Yes. Did anyone physically force him to press the button? Not according to the article. So imo, he did earn the time, but that has nothing to do with his family or their citizenship.
  - hackaflocka 11y ago
    Israel seems to have achieved quite a lot of success with collective punishment. Why not the U.S.?
    - mikeash 11y ago
      Israel is in a state of constant tension and war. If that's what "success" looks like, then let's fail.
    - theworstshill 11y ago
      Relative successes to stabilize itself, yes - but its in a constant state of war. There is already no faith in the justice system there so it won't get any worse. However, even that hardly justifies demolishing the houses of families of terrorists.
TerryADavis 11y ago
The CIA must surrender unconditionally to the IRA. God talks. I win. You lose. God says... Hornblower's depository's peskier caws commuted burgeoning requisitions oyster pike's sundering retaliates undertones putrefy untaught recentest Reunion Belau's flap's bifurcate umbel mosque prospers fumigator's Gilda jute invaliding leach Medusa's ricked greener blackmailers relent Claudette petunia's velds trash's temporizing clammy shebangs Africa's terminological Tsiolkovsky chirruping japed planking mutability's prepared crooning propositions bubbly twofold Vassar collusive Rheingau straightforwardly sacrilegious Dunkirk's toxic Ronstadt Beatlemania's Nicobar turpitude xylem supervises bodkin dispenses elliptic orb Alec Murrumbidgee prototypes sprout's squalled switchback's goggle's legacy bunging slab exhume motorway ruble's Araguaya's stingiest musicals Mirach millionaires McLean's stovepipe's recalls afflictions eliminates sauces preclude winter's operands hereafters goutiest succumbing pimpernel's prey's
BeefySwain 11y ago
I didn't know buzzfeed put out articles of substance.
- hammock 11y ago
  http://www.buzzfeed.com/news http://www.buzzfeed.com/news
- joelrunyon 11y ago
  Surprisingly, they do. It's a very weird mix of horrible surface-level junk and in-depth, interesting articles. Gotta be a weird business/cultural mix.
  - pavel_lishin 11y ago
    I wonder if there's any overlap in the writers. Is there a room full of people generating serious content, surrounded by content farmers? Or are they obligated to generate five listicles for every paragraph of investigative journalism?
    - DasIch 11y ago
      You can see the articles each author wrote so you can actually get a good picture on that. It looks like there are some people that only do content farming and others that do a mix of both.
      - qq66 11y ago
        There's gotta be a better word for "content farming" that doesn't make it sound like the productive labor of turning sunlight and water into food.
- DasIch 11y ago
  They have a quite a few articles of substance. However as many publishers are finding out and as buzzfeed also has realized such articles don't make any money. That's why in addition to their actual journalism they have clickbait that makes them money.
TerryADavis 11y ago
God says... diluted Zyrtec's insoles uncivilized lanolin's woozy qua brazier piazza's banal Rita fanciers thirteen coxcombs toughened xylem wont's instructions mischievousness's millimeter's dapperest nakedness bimonthly's plays kidders paintbrushes grocery complexion's Burgundy's auction shoehorn's audiophiles estimates daiquiri thy apposition's elaborateness irrational's blotter ionization Salado transcript newly shadiest sullener subtotal Camemberts trestle vociferated Veronese guessable typewriting participant's roundups stampedes frond's percussionist's Langerhans's sadism's weighty rent's accountants carryall's detonators Frost's workweek fawns quartz's styling excludes Mahicans alleviation Kaitlin's methods Britain stows Berkeley indispensable mecca superchargers metered eagerness's blissful subset properly homesteads cowgirl's Walker easiness Marcia's Noah's ecclesiastic's Calais progesterone handset's Antarctic's sidestepped glades package soggiest https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFG-4Ge668 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFG-4Ge668
pcl 11y ago
In this context, FAA is a 2008 amendment to the FISA legislation, not the Federal Aviation Administration.
- bsimpson 11y ago
  I definitely clicked the link going "WTF does the FAA have to do with FBI entrapment?" Until I read the article, I had no idea there was a FISA-enabling law also called the FAA.
richardwhiuk 11y ago
Wonderful, it's the FBI and intelligence agencies that are responsible for radicalising people in order to arrest them later. Presumably some of them drop through the net after they've been successfully radicalised. Well, least it's consistent with US policy with the mujahideen from Afghanistan against the Soviets.
joshAg 11y ago
TLDR: don't ever contact the cops because they will fuck shit up even worse than if you didn't call.
ameen 11y ago
As a Muslim, this article is an eye opener as to how individuals become radicalised. Part of it is due to Terrorist publications, I don't see why these articles/magazines aren't actively being taken down. Most Daesh foreign fighters were recruited through such channels as well. The other part is unfortunately due to radicalisation by the FBI and other state agencies. Had this teen been made to work for an honest living — as he was trying to by working on a fishing boat, would he realise the value of life. And part of his personality seems odd as well, he's hypocritical and blames his transgressions on western society whereas there are countless cases of individuals living a productive & a peaceful life. His parents' approach has been reactive instead of being preemptive. Had they known of him sneaking around and being with shady characters they should've had a proper intervention and led him on the right path. Parenting is hard, and unfortunately this is a case of failed parenting.
- hackaflocka 11y ago
  Why take them down when leaving them up acts as a honey-pot to trap would-be recruits.
  - CydeWeys 11y ago
    Having a honeypot is not helpful. You can never kill all the people who don't like you. Better to not have them join up with the enemy in the first place. All the regimes that were historically the most successful at stifling dissent and opposition knew this and did it.
- bsimpson 11y ago
  Hmmm... Daesh is clearly an evil organization that needs to be eradicated. At the same time, most of us side with Snowden vs the NSA because we believe the freedom of citizens at large is crucial, and that the government cannot be trusted to erode the rights of only the wicked. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting rights - it's supposed to empower citizens to resist the unjust use of force, either by an invading army or by a corrupt domestic military. In the same way, the 1st Amendment only has value when it protects all speech, not just politically popular speech. Disrupting Daesh recruitment by whatever means necessary feels correct, but I can't shake a "first they came for the Socialists..." feeling about shutting down allegedly pro-terror publications.
coldcode 11y ago
I hope finally we have someone who can challenge the unconstitutional behavior of our government. Our idiotic judicial rules always seem to rule in favor of the government and the prosecution when it comes to FISA. Maybe it will finally be stopped. Or not, the supremes aren't always consistent in their "interpretation" of the obvious.
- mulmen 11y ago
  Please remember that it falls to us, the voters and citizens to enact the laws that we see fit. The judicial branch only interprets the law, we still have the ability to change it if we disagree. Apathy is the enemy of democracy.
dTal 11y ago
>When the agents learned of Mohamud’s plans to travel to Alaska, they worried he might try to continue to Pakistan or Yemen. They placed him on the no-fly list. Really?
- hackaflocka 11y ago
  Why not?
- CydeWeys 11y ago
  It seems like a perfectly valid use of the no-fly list, unlike in the cases of the majority of people who are put on it. There are flights (with transfers) you can take from Alaska to Pakistan or Yemen. It's not unreasonable at all.
  - viraptor 11y ago
    Seems like a good reason to at least have an international and local no-fly list separate. How's access to flights in Alaska different from access to flights in every other state? Unless there is a difference and I'm missing something?
Karunamon 11y ago
“Do you guys know Pioneer Square?” the teen said. “When they have events, everybody comes up there. So, on the 26th of November, they have a Christmas tree lighting and some 25,000 people attend. You know, the streets are packed. I thought, I thought if you could help me, you know, to have, to have a truck. … You know, explosives, inshallah.” “And this is what’s in your heart?” Youssef said. “You know, there’s going to be a lot of children there.” “Yeah, I mean, that’s what I’m looking for,” Mohamud said. Providing this is an accurate recounting of events (this IS the FBI we're talking about), it was at this point that I stopped caring about the poor misled / "entrapped" teenager. He just flat out said he wanted to kill a bunch of people including innocent children. And was given multiple outs by the so-called entrappers. Entrapment nothing - this sounds like a legitimate sting operation to me that got a dangerous killer off the streets.
- DennisP 11y ago
  They're not complaining about the entrapment in the appeal, and it's not just about that one guy. This is the first criminal case challenging wholesale warrantless surveillance in court.
  - Karunamon 11y ago
    Which is fine, and even necessary, but the article and many commenters here go out of their way to castigate the FBI for "trapping" this kid, which is plainly not the case.
    - dnr 11y ago
      Do you think, if the FBI hadn't gotten involved, that he would have had the initiative to put this plan, or any similar plan, into action himself? Based on the article, it seems to me that he almost certainly would not have. He appears to be naive, gullible, and latching on to one thing or other for direction. When placed on a perfectly set up stage for doing something horrible, he did it. But without that perfect stage, what would he have done? He's clearly not a "good person", and could definitely be described as "immoral". But it's not clear to me that he's a criminal and deserves jail time. It seems like he didn't meet the requirements for an entrapment defense, at least according to the jury. But it still seems very close to entrapment: he's essentially being punished for a a tendency or a willingness to do horrible things, even if he would never have done them without specific encouragement.
rtl49 11y ago
This seems like a tragic situation. There are some strong indications that personal and social problems are what drove Mohamud to embrace Islam, and that therefore these are in some sense responsible for making him susceptible to becoming 'radicalized.' However, unlike some others in this thread, I don't find myself privately rejoicing that a legal technicality has now presented him with a chance of freedom. Whatever the causes of his antipathy toward the United States, and however you feel about the surveillance state and general disregard among law enforcement for our constitutional rights, Mohamud demonstrated a very clear intention to kill many people whom he never met. This cannot be attributed to entrapment, even if it is ultimately shown that his constitutional rights have been violated. I hope Mohamud has overcome whatever psychological state led him into this situation. If it could be shown that he is truly better, I would have no objection to his return to society. But there is something absurd about the possibility that a person with a demonstrated propensity for mass violence might be returned to society at large without any legal restrictions, psychological treatment, or period of supervision.
- DennisP 11y ago
  The appeal isn't about entrapment, it's about wholesale warrantless surveillance of American citizens. > Mohamud is the very first criminal defendant to challenge the FAA before a court of appeals, which opens the door for a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court. The appeal has widespread implications: The controversial law provides the legal framework for the mass surveillance programs that Edward Snowden revealed in 2013. > “It’s not an exaggeration,” Patrick Toomey, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney, told BuzzFeed News, “to say that the privacy rights of millions of Americans potentially hang in the balance of his case.”
  - rtl49 11y ago
    I didn't claim it was about entrapment. I was anticipating a potential objection, that Mohamud was 'radicalized' by the agents involved in this situation, which another comment implied. I understand the legal implications. If only our legal system were not organized such that one must invest so much effort into proving 'standing,' perhaps we could respond to the situation rationally instead of choosing between two potentially negative outcomes.
powera 11y ago
"One day, the devil came to God and said let's make a bet between you and me for the soul of a man. And from on high, they looked down on Job, a devout man, religious. And the devil said, I can change his mind and make him curse your name. And God said try him, you will only fail. So the devil begins. He kills Job's herds and takes his fields. He plagues him with boils and throws him on the ash heap, but Job's mind remains unchanged. So I ask you son, if the devil couldn't change Job's mind, how the hell are you going to change mine?" ... apparently in this case the devil could change Job's mind.
ern 11y ago
Wahhabism, a traditionalist Sunni practice Wahabism (Salafism) is decidedly not traditionalist. At best, it's a form of degraded literalism that abandons 1400 years of exegesis for an anarchic reading of Islamic texts. It lends itself easily to terrorism, and, as the founding doctrine of the Saudi state, it is gaining traction in much of the world. It seems to have particular appeal for "born again" types like the subject of this article.
celticninja 11y ago
The guy is an idiot. What was his part of the plan? He was there to push the button only. He deserves to be in prison for sheer stupidity.
tekromancr 11y ago
It's not hard to take a troubled, isolated young person, isolate them further, become their primary source of love and support, feed into grandiose fantasies about how killing is the right thing and turn them into a killer. It is literally how every military in the world operates. We have seen proven experimentally otherwise well adjusted (albeit white educated industrialized rich democratic college students mostly) will do horrible things if a person of authority simply tells them to. As far as I can tell from this account, that is more or less what happened here. A high-stakes version of the Milgrim experiment. I think we need a new approach. I think in situations where it is applicable, authorities should attempt to positively intervene in a person's life when, for example, in this situation where they collect information about a highschool student who starts interacting with editors of extremist publications. That sort of things should shoot up red flags that someone needs help, rather than wait a few years and see if they can get them to try to kill people.

109 points by BDGC 11y ago

This doesn't just happen in the US. Here in Canada a seemingly similar instance occurred: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-legislature-bomb-plotters-entrapment-claims-hard-to-prove-1.3098654 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-legislatu... http://www.citynews.ca/2015/09/17/lawyers-in-b-c-court-argue-for-access-to-secret-documents-from-spy-agency/ http://www.citynews.ca/2015/09/17/lawyers-in-b-c-court-argue...

hackaflocka 11y ago

Anyone have details on how Mohamed Osman Mohamud's family came to the U.S.? Were they refugees? (He was born in Somalia.) Carrots and Sticks: The U.S. is great at giving individuals carrots. It needs to start giving individuals sticks. This teen's family should be stripped of their citizenship and sent back to Somalia. Reason: this kid probably learned at least some of his hatred for the U.S. at the dinner table. Edit: I'm a foreigner myself in the U.S. myself. And I love the U.S.

scintill76 11y ago
> The family fled to America. Mohamud’s father, Osman Mohamud Barre, went first, quitting his engineering professorship at Somali National University. Mohamud stayed behind, spending a year in a Kenyan refugee camp with his mother, Mariam Hassan. > The U.S. granted Barre refugee status. He settled in Hillsboro, Oregon, where he worked 13 hours a day at an Intel assembly line. By 1993, he had saved enough money to bring his family to the U.S. “They were malnourished and suffering, but they were happy,” Barre later testified at his son’s trial. “We were grateful to America.” -- Above quote is from the article > This teen's family should be stripped of their citizenship and sent back to Somalia. Reason: this kid probably learned at least some of his hatred for the U.S. at the dinner table. Yeah, and the families of felons should be put in prison too, since the felons probably learned their hatred for society and the law at the dinner table. /sarcasm
- hackaflocka 11y ago
  It's kind of like the difference between helping your own family and a stranger. If I take a stranger in, I will throw him/her out if they do unacceptable things. With family, I may not throw them out. Refugees etc. are not born in the U.S. = strangers. U.S. citizens born here = family.
  - user_0001 11y ago
    Why stop there? Anyone without family dating back say, more than 600 years - back to country to origin?
  - scintill76 11y ago
    Setting aside your opinion on the transitive property of criminality, refugees probably do have some sorts of probationary legal status.. until they become citizens. It is apparently possible to be denaturalized[0], but it's not taken lightly. I guess you could argue for a new half-citizen class for refugees, or that refugees shouldn't be granted citizenship, but those would be too late to affect how this family has a legal right to be treated. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_c...
  - mikeash 11y ago
    That's an argument for deporting non-citizens who commit major crimes. And guess what? That's what we often do! But none of this is an argument for deporting or otherwise punishing the families of non-citizens who commit major crimes. How could you possibly justify that?
bobwaycott 11y ago
All you had to do was read to find out about the family. There are several grafs devoted to the family's history and its surmised impact on Mohamud. And yeah, let's definitely start stripping entire families of citizenship because of something a member of their family does, or for not being good enough country-lovers. What could possibly go wrong?
- hackaflocka 11y ago
  Liberal hand-wringing.
  - drdeca 11y ago
    I don't think this comment contributes all that much. "Liberal hand-wringing" is I think largely (though, not entirely) an expression of sentiment, not an expression of fact. (similar phrases about other places in the political "spectrum" would be similar in this regard. My comment is about the type of comment, not about the specifics of liberal vs somethingotherthanliberal). The "liberal" part is contentful enough I guess, but it doesn't really add much to the conversation, because any comment which is disagreeing with a comment that is meant to defend, e.g., muslim immigrants or w/e could be expected to, most of the time, consider the post they are responding to, to be too liberal (again, similarly, this could be reflected partywise. I'm not making a point about specific parties). The hand-wringing, I think, suggests, I guess, worrying too much about something, or, trying too hard to be seen as being concerned about something? one part of this is the "too much", and, the phrase is just, generally a disparaging phrase. But, accusing the comment one is responding to, of being just for posturing, doesn't really seem like something that contributes all that much? I mean, sure, it could be true, but isn't more important than the motivations of what is said, the accuracy or validity of what is said? Also, the ambiguity of the meaning of calling something "hand-wringing" I think also reduced the content of it. If someone says "No, that technically isn't liberal-handwringing", what would they be saying? If it doesn't mean much to dispute a statement, then it doesn't mean much to make the statement. So, generally, I think your comment that this comment is a reply to, is almost without content.
  - dang 11y ago
btym 11y ago
If you had read the article at all, you would know that Mohamud's parents sacrificed a lot to give him the opportunity of a fulfilling life. I find it hard to believe that he learned such hate from people who raised him with such love.
- ern 11y ago
  Your point of view is rather charitable. His parents neglected to give him much of a moral foundation. Home-grown jihadists in the West seem to have a common story: parents move to the West, kid develops an identity crisis. Kid has no clue about religion, so looks to the Internet or local charismatic figure, and gets some form of salafist jihadism. Becomes radicalized and plans, or perpetrates an act of violence. Parents have a responsibility to ensure that their kids know that blowing people up is not acceptable. I don't think he learned hate from them, but there is an element of neglect on their part.
theworstshill 11y ago
If he did, unless it can be proven in a court of law do you really think collective punishment would help justice in this case? Do I think he was entrapped? Yes. Did anyone physically force him to press the button? Not according to the article. So imo, he did earn the time, but that has nothing to do with his family or their citizenship.
- hackaflocka 11y ago
  Israel seems to have achieved quite a lot of success with collective punishment. Why not the U.S.?
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Israel is in a state of constant tension and war. If that's what "success" looks like, then let's fail.
  - theworstshill 11y ago
    Relative successes to stabilize itself, yes - but its in a constant state of war. There is already no faith in the justice system there so it won't get any worse. However, even that hardly justifies demolishing the houses of families of terrorists.

TerryADavis 11y ago

The CIA must surrender unconditionally to the IRA. God talks. I win. You lose. God says... Hornblower's depository's peskier caws commuted burgeoning requisitions oyster pike's sundering retaliates undertones putrefy untaught recentest Reunion Belau's flap's bifurcate umbel mosque prospers fumigator's Gilda jute invaliding leach Medusa's ricked greener blackmailers relent Claudette petunia's velds trash's temporizing clammy shebangs Africa's terminological Tsiolkovsky chirruping japed planking mutability's prepared crooning propositions bubbly twofold Vassar collusive Rheingau straightforwardly sacrilegious Dunkirk's toxic Ronstadt Beatlemania's Nicobar turpitude xylem supervises bodkin dispenses elliptic orb Alec Murrumbidgee prototypes sprout's squalled switchback's goggle's legacy bunging slab exhume motorway ruble's Araguaya's stingiest musicals Mirach millionaires McLean's stovepipe's recalls afflictions eliminates sauces preclude winter's operands hereafters goutiest succumbing pimpernel's prey's

BeefySwain 11y ago

I didn't know buzzfeed put out articles of substance.

hammock 11y ago
http://www.buzzfeed.com/news http://www.buzzfeed.com/news
joelrunyon 11y ago
Surprisingly, they do. It's a very weird mix of horrible surface-level junk and in-depth, interesting articles. Gotta be a weird business/cultural mix.
- pavel_lishin 11y ago
  I wonder if there's any overlap in the writers. Is there a room full of people generating serious content, surrounded by content farmers? Or are they obligated to generate five listicles for every paragraph of investigative journalism?
  - DasIch 11y ago
    You can see the articles each author wrote so you can actually get a good picture on that. It looks like there are some people that only do content farming and others that do a mix of both.
    - qq66 11y ago
      There's gotta be a better word for "content farming" that doesn't make it sound like the productive labor of turning sunlight and water into food.
DasIch 11y ago
They have a quite a few articles of substance. However as many publishers are finding out and as buzzfeed also has realized such articles don't make any money. That's why in addition to their actual journalism they have clickbait that makes them money.

TerryADavis 11y ago

God says... diluted Zyrtec's insoles uncivilized lanolin's woozy qua brazier piazza's banal Rita fanciers thirteen coxcombs toughened xylem wont's instructions mischievousness's millimeter's dapperest nakedness bimonthly's plays kidders paintbrushes grocery complexion's Burgundy's auction shoehorn's audiophiles estimates daiquiri thy apposition's elaborateness irrational's blotter ionization Salado transcript newly shadiest sullener subtotal Camemberts trestle vociferated Veronese guessable typewriting participant's roundups stampedes frond's percussionist's Langerhans's sadism's weighty rent's accountants carryall's detonators Frost's workweek fawns quartz's styling excludes Mahicans alleviation Kaitlin's methods Britain stows Berkeley indispensable mecca superchargers metered eagerness's blissful subset properly homesteads cowgirl's Walker easiness Marcia's Noah's ecclesiastic's Calais progesterone handset's Antarctic's sidestepped glades package soggiest https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFG-4Ge668 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFG-4Ge668

pcl 11y ago

In this context, FAA is a 2008 amendment to the FISA legislation, not the Federal Aviation Administration.

bsimpson 11y ago
I definitely clicked the link going "WTF does the FAA have to do with FBI entrapment?" Until I read the article, I had no idea there was a FISA-enabling law also called the FAA.

richardwhiuk 11y ago

Wonderful, it's the FBI and intelligence agencies that are responsible for radicalising people in order to arrest them later. Presumably some of them drop through the net after they've been successfully radicalised. Well, least it's consistent with US policy with the mujahideen from Afghanistan against the Soviets.

joshAg 11y ago

TLDR: don't ever contact the cops because they will fuck shit up even worse than if you didn't call.

ameen 11y ago

As a Muslim, this article is an eye opener as to how individuals become radicalised. Part of it is due to Terrorist publications, I don't see why these articles/magazines aren't actively being taken down. Most Daesh foreign fighters were recruited through such channels as well. The other part is unfortunately due to radicalisation by the FBI and other state agencies. Had this teen been made to work for an honest living — as he was trying to by working on a fishing boat, would he realise the value of life. And part of his personality seems odd as well, he's hypocritical and blames his transgressions on western society whereas there are countless cases of individuals living a productive & a peaceful life. His parents' approach has been reactive instead of being preemptive. Had they known of him sneaking around and being with shady characters they should've had a proper intervention and led him on the right path. Parenting is hard, and unfortunately this is a case of failed parenting.

hackaflocka 11y ago
Why take them down when leaving them up acts as a honey-pot to trap would-be recruits.
- CydeWeys 11y ago
  Having a honeypot is not helpful. You can never kill all the people who don't like you. Better to not have them join up with the enemy in the first place. All the regimes that were historically the most successful at stifling dissent and opposition knew this and did it.
bsimpson 11y ago
Hmmm... Daesh is clearly an evil organization that needs to be eradicated. At the same time, most of us side with Snowden vs the NSA because we believe the freedom of citizens at large is crucial, and that the government cannot be trusted to erode the rights of only the wicked. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting rights - it's supposed to empower citizens to resist the unjust use of force, either by an invading army or by a corrupt domestic military. In the same way, the 1st Amendment only has value when it protects all speech, not just politically popular speech. Disrupting Daesh recruitment by whatever means necessary feels correct, but I can't shake a "first they came for the Socialists..." feeling about shutting down allegedly pro-terror publications.

coldcode 11y ago

I hope finally we have someone who can challenge the unconstitutional behavior of our government. Our idiotic judicial rules always seem to rule in favor of the government and the prosecution when it comes to FISA. Maybe it will finally be stopped. Or not, the supremes aren't always consistent in their "interpretation" of the obvious.

mulmen 11y ago
Please remember that it falls to us, the voters and citizens to enact the laws that we see fit. The judicial branch only interprets the law, we still have the ability to change it if we disagree. Apathy is the enemy of democracy.

dTal 11y ago

>When the agents learned of Mohamud’s plans to travel to Alaska, they worried he might try to continue to Pakistan or Yemen. They placed him on the no-fly list. Really?

hackaflocka 11y ago
Why not?
CydeWeys 11y ago
It seems like a perfectly valid use of the no-fly list, unlike in the cases of the majority of people who are put on it. There are flights (with transfers) you can take from Alaska to Pakistan or Yemen. It's not unreasonable at all.
- viraptor 11y ago
  Seems like a good reason to at least have an international and local no-fly list separate. How's access to flights in Alaska different from access to flights in every other state? Unless there is a difference and I'm missing something?

Karunamon 11y ago

“Do you guys know Pioneer Square?” the teen said. “When they have events, everybody comes up there. So, on the 26th of November, they have a Christmas tree lighting and some 25,000 people attend. You know, the streets are packed. I thought, I thought if you could help me, you know, to have, to have a truck. … You know, explosives, inshallah.” “And this is what’s in your heart?” Youssef said. “You know, there’s going to be a lot of children there.” “Yeah, I mean, that’s what I’m looking for,” Mohamud said. Providing this is an accurate recounting of events (this IS the FBI we're talking about), it was at this point that I stopped caring about the poor misled / "entrapped" teenager. He just flat out said he wanted to kill a bunch of people including innocent children. And was given multiple outs by the so-called entrappers. Entrapment nothing - this sounds like a legitimate sting operation to me that got a dangerous killer off the streets.

DennisP 11y ago
They're not complaining about the entrapment in the appeal, and it's not just about that one guy. This is the first criminal case challenging wholesale warrantless surveillance in court.
- Karunamon 11y ago
  Which is fine, and even necessary, but the article and many commenters here go out of their way to castigate the FBI for "trapping" this kid, which is plainly not the case.
  - dnr 11y ago
    Do you think, if the FBI hadn't gotten involved, that he would have had the initiative to put this plan, or any similar plan, into action himself? Based on the article, it seems to me that he almost certainly would not have. He appears to be naive, gullible, and latching on to one thing or other for direction. When placed on a perfectly set up stage for doing something horrible, he did it. But without that perfect stage, what would he have done? He's clearly not a "good person", and could definitely be described as "immoral". But it's not clear to me that he's a criminal and deserves jail time. It seems like he didn't meet the requirements for an entrapment defense, at least according to the jury. But it still seems very close to entrapment: he's essentially being punished for a a tendency or a willingness to do horrible things, even if he would never have done them without specific encouragement.

rtl49 11y ago

This seems like a tragic situation. There are some strong indications that personal and social problems are what drove Mohamud to embrace Islam, and that therefore these are in some sense responsible for making him susceptible to becoming 'radicalized.' However, unlike some others in this thread, I don't find myself privately rejoicing that a legal technicality has now presented him with a chance of freedom. Whatever the causes of his antipathy toward the United States, and however you feel about the surveillance state and general disregard among law enforcement for our constitutional rights, Mohamud demonstrated a very clear intention to kill many people whom he never met. This cannot be attributed to entrapment, even if it is ultimately shown that his constitutional rights have been violated. I hope Mohamud has overcome whatever psychological state led him into this situation. If it could be shown that he is truly better, I would have no objection to his return to society. But there is something absurd about the possibility that a person with a demonstrated propensity for mass violence might be returned to society at large without any legal restrictions, psychological treatment, or period of supervision.

DennisP 11y ago
The appeal isn't about entrapment, it's about wholesale warrantless surveillance of American citizens. > Mohamud is the very first criminal defendant to challenge the FAA before a court of appeals, which opens the door for a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court. The appeal has widespread implications: The controversial law provides the legal framework for the mass surveillance programs that Edward Snowden revealed in 2013. > “It’s not an exaggeration,” Patrick Toomey, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney, told BuzzFeed News, “to say that the privacy rights of millions of Americans potentially hang in the balance of his case.”
- rtl49 11y ago
  I didn't claim it was about entrapment. I was anticipating a potential objection, that Mohamud was 'radicalized' by the agents involved in this situation, which another comment implied. I understand the legal implications. If only our legal system were not organized such that one must invest so much effort into proving 'standing,' perhaps we could respond to the situation rationally instead of choosing between two potentially negative outcomes.

powera 11y ago

"One day, the devil came to God and said let's make a bet between you and me for the soul of a man. And from on high, they looked down on Job, a devout man, religious. And the devil said, I can change his mind and make him curse your name. And God said try him, you will only fail. So the devil begins. He kills Job's herds and takes his fields. He plagues him with boils and throws him on the ash heap, but Job's mind remains unchanged. So I ask you son, if the devil couldn't change Job's mind, how the hell are you going to change mine?" ... apparently in this case the devil could change Job's mind.

ern 11y ago

Wahhabism, a traditionalist Sunni practice Wahabism (Salafism) is decidedly not traditionalist. At best, it's a form of degraded literalism that abandons 1400 years of exegesis for an anarchic reading of Islamic texts. It lends itself easily to terrorism, and, as the founding doctrine of the Saudi state, it is gaining traction in much of the world. It seems to have particular appeal for "born again" types like the subject of this article.

celticninja 11y ago

The guy is an idiot. What was his part of the plan? He was there to push the button only. He deserves to be in prison for sheer stupidity.

tekromancr 11y ago

It's not hard to take a troubled, isolated young person, isolate them further, become their primary source of love and support, feed into grandiose fantasies about how killing is the right thing and turn them into a killer. It is literally how every military in the world operates. We have seen proven experimentally otherwise well adjusted (albeit white educated industrialized rich democratic college students mostly) will do horrible things if a person of authority simply tells them to. As far as I can tell from this account, that is more or less what happened here. A high-stakes version of the Milgrim experiment. I think we need a new approach. I think in situations where it is applicable, authorities should attempt to positively intervene in a person's life when, for example, in this situation where they collect information about a highschool student who starts interacting with editors of extremist publications. That sort of things should shoot up red flags that someone needs help, rather than wait a few years and see if they can get them to try to kill people.