Stunning Arrest Made in Milwaukee

[Indus]

Maybe I am not making myself clear.

Liberal views of open borders and tolerance will come into conflict of intolerant groups. The obama administration is welcoming how many immigrants into the nation? What checks do we have to make sure extremist are not getting in?

A couple of the people of the recent Paris attacks used fake passports.

Liberals: Come on in, nobody should be denied entry.

Extreme intolerant group: Lets get some guns, or explosives, and kill some people.

Liberals progressive immigration policy is gong to bite us in the butt.

Have you ever been through the immigration process or know what it entails?

It's a long process and there are many security checks.

Look up visajourney forums to get the skinny if you're really curious.

And now my spouse went through the immigration process over a year before she got her green card.

Do you know how many binders of information and tax records and proof of relationship it required?

And guess what? It's only a 2 year green card.. I have to show all that proof and more in a year and then I have to teach her to answer questions for her citizenship interview..

Oh BTW I know people who had their green cards held up 9 years in Advanced Processing Security Check for no other reason other than they might be a terrorist when they were not muslim at all.. they were just a military aged male.

How is that for a liberal progressive immigration policy? Clearly you're full of hate and no logic and just wanting to rant to up your post count.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Texashiker, this is America. Part of the price we pay for our freedom is the possibility of paying in blood for welcoming other freedom seekers. If you are unwilling to pay the price, there are no end of more restrictive regimes to make you feel safe. Of course, there may be other restrictions on your freedoms you'd be even less happy about.

 

[Texashiker]

You're not just an idiot, you're the biggest idiot on the forum:

Apparently the muslim liberal kenyan terrorist mullah in chief is not letting everyone inside the country

Uhm, have you even checked to see if he is an immigrant? My search shows he is a Miami native (on his Facebook.) You need to check your views, you seem to be twisting the story without information.

Not sure whats yalls problem is? the obama administration is welcoming tens of thousands of immigrants into the nation with little to no background checks.

A bill to tighten the checks was blocked in the senate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/us/politics/senate-refugee-screening-bill-syria-iraq.html

WASHINGTON — A bill that would have greatly tightened screening procedures on refugees from Syria and Iraq failed on a procedural vote in the Senate on Wednesday, saving President Obama from another vexing veto scenario on an issue that has divided the country.

 

[umbrella39]

Allahu akbar, liberals. Hope you get used to hearing that because it ain't going to end as long as you keep letting these fucktards into our country.

 

[zinfamous]

YOU'RE the one I see in most threads making everything about scary muslims, and making it racial. I personally don't care if the FBI is entrapping white buddists, red christians, orange jews or yellow athiests in plots to commit mass murder. I have very little sympathy for anyone that doesn't go STRAIGHT to an authority the minute someone in their midst is seriously trying to recruit others or themselves in mass murder plots.

Being poor, being young, being of a certain race of religion you for some dumb reason believes is beyond criticism because your PC bone kneejerks into your chin so hard your brain is rattled loose, doesn't create exceptions to this.

You are obviously mistaking me for someone else.

 

[zinfamous]

I watched it, that was very close if not entrapment itself based on the backgrounds of those and the amount of coaxing and monetary temptation on those guys,

desperate men are not the same as true believer types

but this one looks different, and he actually states he wants to kill at least 30 masons.

Yeah.

What the dildoheads here have ignored about my posts is that I or no one else really knows all of the details about this one--yet. Maybe it's legit, maybe not--my only point is that we have yet to see a real case of the FBI stopping a real terrorist prior to a legit terrorist act. (I still contend that, legally, you can't really prosecute someone for something that they haven't done--am I wrong?) I know we've set up kangaroo courts and policies to FIGHT TERRER! that "allow" us to do such things, but it's always under dubious circumstances.

 

[zinfamous]

Maybe I am not making myself clear.

Liberal views of open borders and tolerance will come into conflict of intolerant groups. The obama administration is welcoming how many immigrants into the nation? What checks do we have to make sure extremist are not getting in?

A couple of the people of the recent Paris attacks used fake passports.

Liberals: Come on in, nobody should be denied entry.

Extreme intolerant group: Lets get some guns, or explosives, and kill some people.

Liberals progressive immigration policy is gong to bite us in the butt.

what makes you think this is liberal progressive immigration policy? Be truthful--can you cite a source where this idea you have of liberal immigration policy is an actual platform endorsed by, what, the Democratic party? Is that what you call liberal?

 

[werepossum]

Maybe I am not making myself clear.

Liberal views of open borders and tolerance will come into conflict of intolerant groups. The obama administration is welcoming how many immigrants into the nation? What checks do we have to make sure extremist are not getting in?

A couple of the people of the recent Paris attacks used fake passports.

Liberals: Come on in, nobody should be denied entry.

Extreme intolerant group: Lets get some guns, or explosives, and kill some people.

Liberals progressive immigration policy is gong to bite us in the butt.

While I agree that this immigration policy is already biting us in the butt, it's also pretty much the immigration policy of the Republican establishment too. Maybe Trump is different, maybe even Cruz is different; certainly the Republican establishment hates them both. However, get past them (and perhaps Dr. Carson) and you'll find pretty much the same immigration policy. Watch what they do, not what they say. When twenty young Saudis executed the most devastating attack on American soil ever, the State Department under Bush (another pro-illegal, pro-amnesty politician) responded by streamlining the process to admit Saudis. Maybe this is worse under Democrats - hell, I'll concede it's worse under Democrats - but essentially this is bipartisan Beltway group think.

Even when Obama gutted enforcement of our immigration laws, at least he stepped up concentration on the worst felons rather than whomever we happened to catch. My point here being that even though the Democrats are worse, they aren't consistently worse across the board. Concentrating on the worst felons and threats among illegals is arguably better for security than deporting/denying more illegals without such an emphasis. (Or at least would be, if we had any way to keep them out.)

 

[cbrunny]

I don't understand why so many posters here are defending this guy.

 

[Zaap]

You are obviously mistaking me for someone else.

Okay, watched it. (I'm at work, and while I watch tons of shit while I'm working, it's often stop-start before I see the whole thing because... I'm also working.)

Here's my take: In that case (and I'm sure others) do I feel the FBI "saved America from some great plot by a bunch of super-dangerous terrorist masterminds?"

No. Absolutely not.

Did the FBI play this up to put a feather in the cap, and allow the usual sensational media spin out of control making more of the case than was actually there?

Yes. Absolutely.


However:
Does that excuse the 4 accused? Does their being poor, dumb as rocks, from a bad neighborhood have a fucking thing what-so-ever to do with anything?

The film starts with Cromitie himself talking on camera about wanting to blow up bridges and 'having come up with other locations' not mentioned.

All four of the accused DID- that's themselves- not with the FBI with a gun to their heads- DID walk with what they thought were bags full of explosives and plant them outside a Jewish center.

They DID drive around with what they thought were functional stinger missles that were going to be used to down aircraft. A bit of video where you say "I don't want to kill anyone, but just damage property" doesn't let someone off the hook for such actions.

So my take on the case is twofold: sure, it's a case of the FBI playing up a sting operation and arrest to make it look like it was some big terrorist plot, when really it was a bunch of bumbling morons caught engaged in something truly stupid. No, it wasn't a victory against terrorism.

BUT: It doesn't excuse or make innocent the 4 people involved. They willfully did shit that most people wouldn't. Offers of money is no excuse. Hell, if it were, then I guess I can just offer someone $250,000 to kill someone I don't like, and if the person accepts it, they're off the hook right, because financial incentive is excuseable? Since-the-fuck-when??

Of course people are motivated by money- MOST people wouldn't accept my offer to become a contract killer for money, nor would they plant car bombs in front of a Jewish center for money. The "B-but they were poor!" argument isn't an excuse for any of that.

While not being terrorists in any real sense, but bumbling wanna-bes, the 4 involved were adults, knew exactly what-the-fuck they THOUGHT they were going to be doing, and therefore deserve the prison sentences they got. I have no sympathy. You're convorting around with what you THINK is a real terrorist, even if you aren't one yourself, the second that person starts trying to get you to blow shit up or kill anyone- report it or at the very least get the fuck away from that person.. done. There's no other excuse and 'poor' or of a certain race or religion doesn't cut it.

A lot of that film was one-sided, only interviewing the defense attorneys. "Bu-but poor people can't commit acts of terror! They had no transportation or resources!!"


I'm left with the feeling that if the FBI had gotten wind of the Boston Bomber plot, and instead of allowing a bunch of people to be blown to shreds, had instead provided those two assholes with what they thought were real bombs- we'd be hearing how that was just two pure as the wind driven snow dudes unfairly targeted and entrapped, and "...gee whiz golly gee, ALL THEY HAD were their own two feet, backpacks and pressure cookers! THE PO can't kill anyone!!"

And of course, no one could really *prove* beyond a doubt otherwise. It'd actually be a pretty good argument- yeah, just a couple of harmless bumblefucks yacking about jihad but no real means to do anything dangerous.

I say about anyone: you're on tape planting what you think is a dangerous bomb around innocents: good fucking riddance to you. There's no excuse for that. It's a seperate issue from whether or not every instance where such happens is 'unfairly targeting muslims' or the FBI patting it's own back or not. People *are* responsbile for their own actions.

 

[Indus]

While I agree that this immigration policy is already biting us in the butt, it's also pretty much the immigration policy of the Republican establishment too.

Which part of it don't you like?

The part where the majority of immigration is by relatives (spouse, parents, children and siblings of US citizens born abroad).. over 1 million per year

The part of tourist visas over 50 million per year

The part of visa exempt for Europeans, and some others?

The part of student visas

The part of religious visas

The part of diversity visas (50,000 per year)

The employment based visas (H1B) (Chinese, Indian, Thai, Polish cusine specialists, nurses and what not)

The EB-5 (have $500000, get your free green card here visa)

 

[Subyman]

Not sure whats yalls problem is? the obama administration is welcoming tens of thousands of immigrants into the nation with little to no background checks.

A bill to tighten the checks was blocked in the senate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/us/politics/senate-refugee-screening-bill-syria-iraq.html

Again what does immigration have to do with this Miami native buying guns to kill people?

There are very few studies that look into immigrant crime, but those that have show that either immigrants are underrepresented (crime rate is lower) or there is no difference in crime rates between immigrants and natural born. There are theoretical reasons such as having to assimilate and not knowing the laws, but the empirical data shows this not to be the case. Immigrant being a "high crime" populace is a myth that is not backed up by scientific study.

 

[Indus]

Again what does immigration have to do with this Miami native buying guns to kill people?

There are very few studies that look into immigrant crime, but those that have show that either immigrants are underrepresented (crime rate is lower) or there is no difference in crime rates between immigrants and natural born. There are theoretical reasons such as having to assimilate and not knowing the laws, but the empirical data shows this not to be the case. Immigrant being a "high crime" populace is a myth that is not backed up by scientific study.

Actually I have a feeling tourists (and drunk tourists) tend to cause more problems than immigrants who know they have to behave and have a good record or their green cards and citizenship might have problems down the line.

 

[werepossum]

I don't understand why so many posters here are defending this guy.

But is anyone really defending him, or simply pointing out that the government often helps radicalize the people it arrests?

 

[michal1980]

First: you really have no clue what any of us are talking about
Second: you're a bleeding pro-isreali anti-muslim super godloving policy head with questionable years of education, based on your posting history here....so I'm not going to take anything you say seriously.

No one here is criticizing the FBI for capturing/preventing terrorists: we are criticizing the fact that they have yet to do that, because all of these cases are about them creating their own jihadi cells to entrap muslims.

I'm not pro-Islamic; I'd say I like Islam the least of all the religions, which I also don't like very much.

You know, some maybe were violent. Some, in the most documented cases, never were in their personal or religious lives, until strongly encouraged by their undercover handlers.

If you actually like justice, then you know these cases are primarily a sham. But you don't. You're a biased sockpuppet for your buddy Netanyahoo. You will always try to play the religion game. I'm above that, because I can at least play the rationality game.

how is it a sham?

If you weren't planning on killing people you wouldn't be buying the 'machine gun' after telling the people you were going to use it to commit an act of terror.

 

[michal1980]

Have you ever been through the immigration process or know what it entails?

It's a long process and there are many security checks.

Look up visajourney forums to get the skinny if you're really curious.

And now my spouse went through the immigration process over a year before she got her green card.

Do you know how many binders of information and tax records and proof of relationship it required?

And guess what? It's only a 2 year green card.. I have to show all that proof and more in a year and then I have to teach her to answer questions for her citizenship interview..

Oh BTW I know people who had their green cards held up 9 years in Advanced Processing Security Check for no other reason other than they might be a terrorist when they were not muslim at all.. they were just a military aged male.

How is that for a liberal progressive immigration policy? Clearly you're full of hate and no logic and just wanting to rant to up your post count.

except if your an illegal that crosses our southern border, then the liberals in this country want to give you a free pass.

 

[Victorian Gray]

I don't understand why so many posters here are defending this guy.

Who has defended him?

 

[michal1980]

Who has defended him?

The ones that are calling this a sham, and a set up by the FBI.

 

[brycejones]

The ones that are calling this a sham, and a set up by the FBI.

Nope.

 

[Victorian Gray]

The ones that are calling this a sham, and a set up by the FBI.

That is not a defense of this guy. That's questioning the tactics of law enforcement.

 

[Indus]

except if your an illegal that crosses our southern border, then the liberals in this country want to give you a free pass.

So take a gun and go man a post at the arizona desert. Not one liberal will stop you for keeping our country safe.

At least then you'll be doing something constructive vs preaching conservaterrorism.

 

[WackyDan]

Mass murder was planned in my hometown. The shooter had procured a machine gun. In an utterly shocking moment, it was discovered that the man was using his Islamic religion as the basis for this attack.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/2...n-accused-planning-masonic-temple-attack.html

Aside from this being yet another fanatical muslim...The"machine" gun was procured via FBI informants. It is highly unlikely that he was able to obtain the first one on his own - provided it was truly automatic to begin with.

 

[Texashiker]

How is that for a liberal progressive immigration policy?

Because the liberels are the ones giving a free pass.

Clearly you're full of hate and no logic and just wanting to rant to up your post count.

Bait.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

I'm left with the feeling that if the FBI had gotten wind of the Boston Bomber plot, and instead of allowing a bunch of people to be blown to shreds, had instead provided those two assholes with what they thought were real bombs- we'd be hearing how that was just two pure as the wind driven snow dudes unfairly targeted and entrapped, and "...gee whiz golly gee, ALL THEY HAD were their own two feet, backpacks and pressure cookers! THE PO can't kill anyone!!"

There is a HUGE difference here. In your hypothetical, the FBI gets wind of the bomb plot that was ALREADY being planned and foils it. In real life, the FBI incites and convinces and bribes people to do these violent things and then foils their own FBI-concocted plan. That is the critical and ONLY meaningful difference. If your hypothetical happened, I think there would pretty much be universal praise and admiration for the FBI's heroics.

If there is a reason that we can throw someone in jail for inciting violence, then why is it OK for the FBI to do it? Why aren't the people who came up with this plan and executed it facing criminal charges? It is just as evil and useless and harmful if the FBI does it or if Zaap does it.

In this thread, I don't see anybody actually excusing the guys who were tricked by the FBI. They tried to do horrible things and I think everyone here can agree that they got just sentences. Don't confuse people saying "bad FBI" with people saying "free the attempted terrorists" because those 2 things don't mean the same thing.

Everything else in your post is pretty spot on.

 

[Zaap]

There is a HUGE difference here. In your hypothetical, the FBI gets wind of the bomb plot that was ALREADY being planned and foils it. In real life, the FBI incites and convinces and bribes people to do these violent things and then foils their own FBI-concocted plan. That is the critical and ONLY meaningful difference. If your hypothetical happened, I think there would pretty much be universal praise and admiration for the FBI's heroics.

I'm not so sure of that. I think we only think of it as a plot that would have been foiled beforehand, because it was actually carried out. The reality of having arrested them before the bombing, would of course mean it wasn't carried out, that it was up to the point of their arrest, just some talk they'd been spewing of wanting to do something.

I cite the Boston bombings as an example relating to a message put forth in that documentary, and that is 'poor' people without access to actual bombs, bomb materials, stinger missles, and other resources shouldn't be taken seriously as terrorists. And unless the FBI catches people with their hands on such things in cartoon fashion with their fingers on a fancy detonator and a clock ticking down to zero, then it's all just framing innocents. (and of course because... racism/hating on Muslims, etc. )

But the Boston bombings go directly against this notion. Had the FBI somehow foiled that, you'd have two wide-eyed 'innocent' teens with thier hands on... rice cookers and backpacks. I don't believe for a minute most people would connect right away with the potential for those to be deadly weapons. We'd probably get laughs from a lot of typically synical people along the lines of "dur-hur hur, what were they gonna do? Pelt people with rice!?"

I'm pretty sure both bombers didn't have previous criminal records to speak of, no history of terrorism, and according to droves of family/friends one could have interviewed "why, just the sweetest lil darlings you ever could know!"

In order to make a real case, it's almost blazingly obvious the FBI or whoever would have probably tried to up the ante and get them (via undercover operative) to use actual bombs recognizable as such, and then nab them. Otherwise, going to court with 'backpacks and rice cookers' as WMDs is almost laughable. Yet unfortunately, as we all witnessed, there was nothing at all laughable or unthreatening about it... AFTER the fact.

Point being- OF COURSE law enforcement is going to try and give suspects rope to hang themselves with, to make a case and actually be able to arrest terrorism suspects. The reason that doesn't bother me, is as I've stated, as long as this is handled legally and professionally, I have no problem with someone hanging themselves with a rope provided by undercover operatives when it involves thinking you're willingly engaging in mass murder. That's not the act of normal, rational people. There's usually a good reason such a person falls under scruitiny in the first place. (Again, these reasons totally missing from the documentary as far as the original ringleader).