After the most recent mass shooting in Orlando, Florida – the worst in U.S.
history – one might ask how the FBI was able to investigate the perpetrator,
without deciding to take any further action. This question is further confounded
by the fact the perpetrator was, according to his wife, an abusive,
unstable man suffering from bipolar disorder.
A more appropriate question would be: what is the role of the FBI in counter-terror
operations? How were they not able to prevent this incident, despite “preventing”
hundreds of high profile incidents prior to this?
Out of the 508 terrorism-related cases since September 11, 2001, more
often than not, the FBI has had a hand in creating the very terrorist threat
they have claimed to be protecting us from. Two-hundred and forty-three of these
an FBI informant. In many instances, the targets of these operations, who
are later accused of plotting attacks, are not only almost always Muslim, but
they are also often suffering from a mental illness, such as schizophrenia.
Moreover, the targets are also vulnerable and easily susceptible to bribery
as they are desperate for money – so desperate, it seems, they will help put
their own friends behind bars.
This can be seen most clearly in the Newburgh
Four case, which saw a combination of mental illness and an urgent need
for money. One of the “Four,” James Cromitie, was a former drug addict who repeatedly
tried to back out, saying “I don’t want anyone to get hurt.” In the words
of a U.S. Court Judge, “only
the government could have made a “terrorist” out of Mr. Cromitie.”
Another defendant in the Newburgh case, Laguerre Payan, suffered from schizophrenia
to the extent he kept bottles of urine in his apartment. David Williams, another
of the four, had a brother who needed a liver transplant, and he was prepared
to do almost anything for the money to pay for it.
The FBI chooses the most vulnerable members of society and then coaxes a relationship
between the target and an “informant,” who helps instigate the terrorist activity.
There is, generally speaking, no evidence the targets would have engaged in
such activity had it not been for the FBI.
The case of Rezwan
Ferdaus involved a man who suffered from severe depression and seizures
and had to wear adult diapers for lack of bladder control. An FBI agent told
the target’s own father Ferdaus was “obviously” mentally ill. Yet Ferdaus became
a target of these FBI operations: he had plans to carry out an attack on a massive
scale on Capitol Hill, which the FBI could then “save” the public from – relishing
in all their glory.
However, prior to this engagement with the FBI, there was, again, no evidence
Ferdaus would have ever engaged in any criminal or terrorist activity. Ferdaus’