6 ms·

The excuse for this massive intrusion is terrorism but: > Nearly all of the highest-profile domestic terrorism plots in the United States since 9/11 featured t

by ingler 12y ago

The excuse for this massive intrusion is terrorism but: > Nearly all of the highest-profile domestic terrorism plots in the United States since 9/11 featured the "direct involvement" of government agents or informants, a new report says. > http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/21/government-agents-directly-involved-us-terror-plots-report http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/21/government-agen...

finid 12y ago
I think the term for what you're hinting at is "baited" or something like that.
- ingler 12y ago
  I was thinking "job security" but baited works too.
rdtsc 12y ago
Exactly. Looking at high level stats one would imagine FBI are just so great at preventing terrorism. Look at all these foiled bridge explosions. Except if you look a bit deeper you start seeing a different picture. Infiltrating mosques, preying on the weaker and feeble-minded. If it weren't tragic and depressing it would be quite funny actually because of this bit: > Yet, far from succeeding, Monteilh eventually so unnerved Orange County's Muslim community that that they got a restraining order against him. In an ironic twist, they also reported Monteilh to the FBI: unaware he was in fact working undercover for the agency. He was such a dickhead that basically he got himself reported back to the FBI.
- ingler 12y ago
  It seems the Feds can only find the morally or intellectually challenged as civilian foils.
- rayiner 12y ago
  Counting deaths is an invalid way of looking at the impact of terrorism. The whole point of terrorism is to impose s greater mental impact than physical one. Now you can say that people should be more rational and not care more about 17 people killed in car accidents than the same killed in the Charlie Hebdo attacks. But they do.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    - rhino369 12y ago
      FYI - You are probably talking about hate crimes. Hate speech is legal in the USA unless you are making a threat. You can go buy 30 minutes of airtime and talk about the holocaust being the greatest achievement in human history. Feds can't do shit.
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    Actually people don't care much more for either. But the media will blow up the terror attacks way out of proportion and in return people will be caring more about them. Terrorism takes 3 parties to play, terrorists, governments and media. If the two that should be wiser refuse to play ball the whole thing falls apart. But the media loves its ratings, the more terror the better for them and governments love to push through their pet laws and terrorists (and child pornographers, software pirates and other undesirables) are convenient hooks to hang those on.
    - LLWM 12y ago
      If people were as interested in car accidents as they were in terrorist attacks, the media would hype those just as happily.
      - TeMPOraL 12y ago
        No they wouldn't, just like they weren't interested in people killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now they aren't interested in people dying in Ukraine - if something is common, happens often, then it doesn't sell, period.
- zaroth 12y ago
  Wow, wish this was reported more broadly. That's quite the repudiation from the Orange County community.
moe 12y ago
Also for perspective: 3467 people in the USA have been killed by terror attacks[1] since 1970. In the same timeframe 2091 americans were killed by lightning strike[2] and roughly 102.000.000 died of old age. [1] http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?chart=fatalities&casualties_type=&casualties_max=&country=217&count=100 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?chart=fatal... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_strike#Epidemiology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_strike#Epidemiology
- 0xffff2 12y ago
  It's probably also worth noting that 9/11 accounts for 2953, or a staggering 85%, of those terror related deaths.
  - boyaka 12y ago
    All the more reason the report should be declassified.
  - Chinjut 12y ago
    Just to clarify where this number comes from: Wikipedia tells me the number of deaths caused by the 9/11 attacks was "2,996 (2,977 victims, 19 hijackers)". Where do I find 2953?
    - boyaka 12y ago
      I think he did what I did: sorted by fatalities, found the top 3 which were 9/11 and added them up. He was missing flight 93 which would bring the total to 2997. Here are the relevant incident summaries: http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200109110004 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtd... http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200109110005 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtd... http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200109110006 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtd... http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200109110007 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtd... Wikipedia has a bunch of random news articles as sources and even it's own entry for casualties saying 2606 at WTC, 125 at Pentagon, and "About 292 people[citation needed]" killed by "burning debris and falling bodies" on the street.

by ingler 12y ago

finid 12y ago

I think the term for what you're hinting at is "baited" or something like that.

ingler 12y ago
I was thinking "job security" but baited works too.

rdtsc 12y ago

Exactly. Looking at high level stats one would imagine FBI are just so great at preventing terrorism. Look at all these foiled bridge explosions. Except if you look a bit deeper you start seeing a different picture. Infiltrating mosques, preying on the weaker and feeble-minded. If it weren't tragic and depressing it would be quite funny actually because of this bit: > Yet, far from succeeding, Monteilh eventually so unnerved Orange County's Muslim community that that they got a restraining order against him. In an ironic twist, they also reported Monteilh to the FBI: unaware he was in fact working undercover for the agency. He was such a dickhead that basically he got himself reported back to the FBI.

ingler 12y ago
It seems the Feds can only find the morally or intellectually challenged as civilian foils.
rayiner 12y ago
Counting deaths is an invalid way of looking at the impact of terrorism. The whole point of terrorism is to impose s greater mental impact than physical one. Now you can say that people should be more rational and not care more about 17 people killed in car accidents than the same killed in the Charlie Hebdo attacks. But they do.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
  - rhino369 12y ago
    FYI - You are probably talking about hate crimes. Hate speech is legal in the USA unless you are making a threat. You can go buy 30 minutes of airtime and talk about the holocaust being the greatest achievement in human history. Feds can't do shit.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  Actually people don't care much more for either. But the media will blow up the terror attacks way out of proportion and in return people will be caring more about them. Terrorism takes 3 parties to play, terrorists, governments and media. If the two that should be wiser refuse to play ball the whole thing falls apart. But the media loves its ratings, the more terror the better for them and governments love to push through their pet laws and terrorists (and child pornographers, software pirates and other undesirables) are convenient hooks to hang those on.
  - LLWM 12y ago
    If people were as interested in car accidents as they were in terrorist attacks, the media would hype those just as happily.
    - TeMPOraL 12y ago
      No they wouldn't, just like they weren't interested in people killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now they aren't interested in people dying in Ukraine - if something is common, happens often, then it doesn't sell, period.
zaroth 12y ago
Wow, wish this was reported more broadly. That's quite the repudiation from the Orange County community.

moe 12y ago

Also for perspective: 3467 people in the USA have been killed by terror attacks[1] since 1970. In the same timeframe 2091 americans were killed by lightning strike[2] and roughly 102.000.000 died of old age. [1] http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?chart=fatalities&casualties_type=&casualties_max=&country=217&count=100 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?chart=fatal... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_strike#Epidemiology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_strike#Epidemiology

0xffff2 12y ago
It's probably also worth noting that 9/11 accounts for 2953, or a staggering 85%, of those terror related deaths.
- boyaka 12y ago
  All the more reason the report should be declassified.
- Chinjut 12y ago
  Just to clarify where this number comes from: Wikipedia tells me the number of deaths caused by the 9/11 attacks was "2,996 (2,977 victims, 19 hijackers)". Where do I find 2953?
  - boyaka 12y ago
    I think he did what I did: sorted by fatalities, found the top 3 which were 9/11 and added them up. He was missing flight 93 which would bring the total to 2997. Here are the relevant incident summaries: http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200109110004 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtd... http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200109110005 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtd... http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200109110006 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtd... http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtdid=200109110007 http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/IncidentSummary.aspx?gtd... Wikipedia has a bunch of random news articles as sources and even it's own entry for casualties saying 2606 at WTC, 125 at Pentagon, and "About 292 people[citation needed]" killed by "burning debris and falling bodies" on the street.