> They show FBI radicalizes people and creates "terrorists", not catches terrorists. They act like criminals and intimidate people into compliance and then arre

> They show FBI radicalizes people and creates "terrorists", not catches terrorists. They act like criminals and intimidate people into compliance and then arrest them. > But for some reason if you tried pretending to be a terrorist, you'd still be a criminal That depends. The informant/infiltrator needs to "play along" till some extend. However, they should also not stimulate other people to commit crimes. It is a careful balance. So for example, if Alice asks Bob to make a bomb, and Bob complies (with a fake bomb), then how exactly did Bob (who works for the FBI) create a terrorist? They didn't. They caught one by pretending being one. Apart from the ability to safely catch Alice red-handed, Bob can also testify the intend of Alice. 2 in 1. Would you rather see it was Charlie who made the bomb, but then a real one? Of course not. Sometimes, this infiltration method is one of the few or the only viable way to catch a terrorist or criminal. It is not without risk though; it is high risk, high reward. Not the first option to be chosen; you want low risk, high reward options first. EDIT: in hindsight it would've been better to use different names, ie. Mallory. I leave the above as-is.