Maroc - EURASIAREVIEW.COM - A la une - 09/Aug 18:52

FBI Terrorism Entrapment Trials, Distortions, And Exposure – OpEd

The United States (US) Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) counterterrorism efforts primarily revolve around the FBI’s use of Confidential Human Sources (CHS), their term for informants and snitches. The FBI aggressively recruits criminals, grifters, scammers, schemers, and others, offering large cash rewards for their participation and additional bonuses for convictions or plea bargains. This encourages ethically-compromised CHS to fabricate, exaggerate, and lie to gain indictments and convictions, with the encouragement and assistance of their FBI handlers. The FBI offers to have jail sentences and criminal charges reduced or dropped for those who participate, while the FBI’s snitches working inside of prisons can see their sentences reduced, in addition to generous perks, including lucrative cash incentives. In addition to soliciting criminals, charlatans, and cons, the FBI aggressively threatens and coerces Muslim immigrants to become Confidential Human Sources. The FBI targets immigrants and people in immigration holds, some of which were initiated by the FBI to give them leverage over frightened, vulnerable immigrants. Some Muslims become informants because the FBI threatened to deport or incarcerate them on dubious charges, if they refuse to participate. Their families are also threatened by FBI agents, who intimidate, harass, and punish innocent Muslims with impunity in an effort to pressure them or their relatives to become informants for the FBI. The FBI has deported or incarcerated Muslims on false charges when they refused to become an informant, and destroyed the lives of other Muslims who refused by putting them on “No Fly” lists, getting them fired from their jobs, disrupting all aspects of their lives, and attacking their families and relatives. FBI tactics are illegal, but the FBI conceals their crimes and fabricates criminal charges to mask their illicit activities. CHS are primarily sent into Muslim communities – from mosques and markets to online chat rooms and social media – to find vulnerable Muslims they can entice or coerce into becoming fake terrorists for fictional FBI terrorism plots. Incentivized CHS strive to get their current criminal charges and pending or current jail sentences reduced or eliminated. They can also get generous paychecks, ranging from about $40,000 up to $250,000 or more per case. This provides strong encouragement for the FBI’s CHS to do whatever it takes – regardless of how unethical or illegal it is – to get people to participate in fake plots, and fabricate evidence to ensure indictments and convictions. Most of the people the FBI’s CHS enticed and pressured to participate in phony FBI terrorism skits would never have been involved in these activities if they had not been destitute and desperate, and then coerced, and bribed by the FBI and their informants. Many of them had psychological, emotional, and financial problems. They typically had no previous contact with terrorist organizations, nor were they ever likely too. Virtually none of the alleged terrorism suspects had the capacity to do anything on their own or as a group. They lacked the knowledge, skills, money, weapons, leadership, and motivation to initiate terrorist attacks, without the FBI and their CHS providing everything, while guiding them through each step of the process. James Wedick, a retired FBI agent, with 35 years of service, commented on the suspects coerced by FBI informants, “what is obvious is that most of the gentlemen not only did not have the capacity to commit the crime, but they didn’t have the means.” Many of the FBI’s informants and snitches are too bribed and incentivized or too threatened and scared, not to participate in entrapments, saying and swearing to whatever the FBI wants. Relying upon the dubious evidence and testimony of the FBI’s highly incentivized, ethically-flawed informers and snitches undermines justice, especially when some of the agents running them are ethically-compromised, as well. Terrorism Entrapment Trials Some of the evidence used against alleged terrorism suspects is classified, making it difficult to challenge. Most of the direct evidence against duped suspects was coerced and staged by FBI informants, directing and manipulating their activities and offering money for their participation. FBI informants have also lied and exaggerated to facilitate indictments and convictions or plea bargains, which can provide them with lucrative bonuses and additional cases, with some informants reportedly becoming millionaires. The lucrative cash incentives, combined with elimination of criminal charges or potential prison sentences, provides strong incentives for informants to fabricate evidence. This has occurred with the knowledge and the assistance of some FBI agents, who coach their informants to enhance their skills at coercion and deceit. Everyone in the courtroom – including the judge, jury, and media – should listen cautiously when the FBI spews their accusations revolving around their fake terrorism plots and incentivized CHS. The respective FBI informant’s history of entrapments, lucrative payments and incentives, and dubious and often repetitive accusations and statements from all of their previous cases should be revealed. These staged terrorism entrapment trials of pseudo terrorists feature incentivized informants, who may spew variations of the rehearsed testimony they’ve used in previous cases. The manipulative minds of greedy informants, combined with the coaching from the FBI, can spin some compelling tales. Though entertaining, these fictional narratives, are often lacking in truth and credibility. The judge, jury, and media should also take note that none of the participants in these fake terror plots ever had any contact with al-Qaeda, ISIS, or any other terrorist or jihadi group, nor were they ever likely to have any contact with any terrorist or insurgent cells. Aggressive prosecutors encourage the judge and jury to ignore the fact that suspects lacked the contacts, skills, resources, and motivation to carry out an attack, without the full assistance from the FBI and their informants at virtually every step of the process. Biased Courts and the FBI’s Pushing for Plea Agreements The FBI directs their informants to lead inept, impoverished, mentally and emotionally challenged recruits and others into making pledges to a terrorist faction, such as ISIS or al-Qaeda. FBI informants encourage, coerce, and bribe the people they’re entrapping to make statements and pledges that will be used to gain indictments and convictions. The recruits are told to repeat what the informant said or wrote. In some cases, the informant tells recruits they want to hear how it sounds. Scheming informants make the social outcasts they’ve recruited feel like they’re elevating their identity and status. These incidents are filmed or recorded by the feds or their informants, often without the knowledge of the participants. These recordings, along with FBI-supplied weapons and props, and the FBI’s exaggerated narratives of the suspects and the case, are meant to make inept dupes look like menacing terrorists, instead of indigent imposters performing theatrical skits. These videos and similar coerced evidence are used to gain plea agreements and convictions. The courts may ignore evidence that desperate, indigent suspects only made the statements or pledges for the money and perks offered, without having any intention of aligning with the group mentioned or carrying out an attack. Recorder and Video “Malfunctions” and Gaps Informants will use recording devices to capture the statements of characters they’ve pressured and enticed to play fake terrorists. The recordings can be used as evidence, encouraging plea deals or convictions. However, their recording devices may be turned off or “unavailable” when the most damaging statements are allegedly made by the suspects. This enables FBI informants to fabricate statements and actions attributed to suspects, with the defense having limited options to effectively counter them. Some unscrupulous, experienced informants may deliberately fail to record specific interactions, providing strategic gaps so they can claim incriminating statements were made by the human prey they’re trying to entrap. Once informants have worked a few cases, they become more proficient at scripting their testimony, steering inept recruits, and creating gaps at strategic points, where the informant can swear their targets made incriminating statements. James Wedick, a retired FBI agent, with 35 years of service, states, “When you look closely, you find that there are conversations that were not recorded that should have been recorded.” Many informants and snitches are hustlers, who know how to manipulate their prey and play the system and the court. They’re coached by their FBI handlers as to what statements and evidence are required to coerce a plea agreement or conviction, and how to manipulate targets and play the system to get them. This enables informants to meet the needs of the case, even if they have to lie and exaggerate to do it. Many informants are very good at steering their fictional terrorists, leading them to say things that will strengthen the case. The FBI provides informants with tips on how to deceive and direct recruits. With the help of their FBI handlers, informants learn how and when they can lie and exaggerate to provide the required evidence. They also learn how specific FBI agents encourage and facilitate their lies and exaggerations, and how plea agreements conceal their deceit. This encourages informants to continue telling lies that will facilitate plea agreements, generating generous payments for informants, with the prospects of more lucrative entrapment paydays in the future. Creative editing of recorded encounters can enable the feds and their informants to create evidence that will facilitate plea bargains and convictions. It appears that virtually nothing illegal or unethical is beyond what the FBI will do to hype terrorism, rack up staged arrests, and elevate unwarranted acclaim for stopping their own terrorism plots. These travesties to justice have been documented by FBI whistleblowers in interviews, congressional testimony, lectures, videos, articles, and books. Informants versus Incentivized Informants While the terms informant and incentivized informant are often used interchangeably, they can have very different meanings. An informant can be defined as “one who informs against others” or “one who gives information.” While these type of explanations can be found in dictionaries, they fail to provide contextual relevance regarding where and why this information is gathered and shared. While interpretations cover a wide range of examples, many people think of an informant as a person who willingly provides information on criminal activities or other issues and events out of a sense of duty or obligation, without expecting or receiving anything in return. The incentivized informant or incentivized witness implies the individual providing information is getting, expecting, or seeking something in return for their participation. Their participation may be conditional, based upon what they can get in return. This “Play-for-Pay” scenario encourages informants to lie and exaggerate to keep playing the game and reaping the rewards, including lots of cash and revolving prison doors. The most common incentivized informants in law enforcement are individuals, who are apprehended or arrested for a crime. Then the game becomes “let’s make a deal,” with either or both sides angling for resolution, typically involving the criminal getting charges reduced or eliminated and law enforcement getting assistance in arresting others. This can involve anything from stolen property and illicit drugs to terrorist activity and human trafficking. The incentivized informant provides information and facilitates undercover operations. They become an incentivized witness when they provide statements, depositions, or courtroom testimony against others. Everything is in play, potentially requiring the person seeking a deal to become an active participant in a sting, so other suspects can be arrested. And so it goes, with law enforcement often using each coerced and incentivized informant to generate additional arrests and informants, who will be coerced, incentivized, or threatened to cooperate. The concept of using incentivized informants is understandable, especially when law enforcement is angling to arrest people higher up the criminal ladder, such as moving from street dealers of heroin, to bigger dealers, wholesalers, and importers. However, in the FBI’s dubious terrorism entrapments, the FBI is not looking to bring down terrorists and their supporters who are higher up the chain. This would be impossible with the suspects they entrap and arrest, because they have no affiliations or contacts with any terrorist group. The FBI is just looking to rack up convictions or plea agreements to enhance their image and justify the additional $3 billion a year the US Congress authorized after the attacks of 9/11, for the FBI to stop future terrorist attacks. The FBI appears to have no concern regarding the unethical to illegal ways they and their informants entrap suspects. Nor do they care that most of their arrests involve fake terrorists, many of whom are indigent, inept, mentally and emotionally challenged, people who have never had any ties to terrorists, and are incapable of ever posing a serious threat. The only thing the FBI cares about is how much they can hype and lie about their own terrorist plots that they “uncovered,” and how much unwarranted media attention and acclaim they can get from complicit and duped media outlets. What else should citizens expect from an agency that continues to name their headquarters after J. Edgar Hoover, one of the most racist, corrupt, criminal, and malicious government officials in the history of the United States? Hoover was also one of the most prolific blackmailers in US history, using blackmail and other illegal activities – funded by US taxpayers – to retain power for 48 years (1924-1972). Hoover was still the Director of the FBI when he died at age 77, having ignored the mandatory government retirement age of 70. FBI Entrapments and Terror Courts are Accused of Being Biased Against Defendants The massive USA Patriot Act, which was quickly passed by both Houses of Congress without being read or properly reviewed and debated, sullies the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, civil liberties, and the rule of law. It enables the FBI and other US government agencies, intelligence and law enforcement agencies, military branches, and other organizations to engage in oppressive Stasi-like surveillance, harassment, and persecution of law-abiding US citizens and others. During the deceitful and destructive Global War On Terrorism (GWOT), the Bill of Rights and the rule of law have been compromised and sullied – from law enforcement procedures to courtroom trials. The enhanced powers given to the FBI and other US government agencies by the USA Patriot Act have enabled aggressive federal agents and prosecutors to erode or eliminate the traditional legal and constitutional process. They have also led to excessive abuses that primarily focus on uncovering dissent among the US population, instead of searching for terrorists and criminals. The US GWOT – from Stasi-like surveillance and terror courts to and brutal torture prisons, abroad – has nullified constitutional, civil, and human rights. Key facets of the US Bill of Rights have been neutralized. First Amendment rights of free speech have been compromised and undermined, enabling US citizens to be prosecuted for expressing personal opinions. The Fourth Amendment, which is meant to prevent undue search and seizure, has become void, obliterated by incessant, multilayered, multidimensional surveillance and abuse. Other rights have also been trampled by the US government and its agencies, military branches, contractors, and affiliates. Virtually each and every step of a terrorist suspect’s case, including recruitment, participation, investigation, interrogation, prosecution, sentencing, and incarceration will see an erosion of the suspects’ rights. Past cases in terrorist courts have generated complaints that FBI prosecutors can initiate terror cases with a lower threshold of credibility and less verifiable evidence and proof than is usually required for criminal cases. This undermines the legal process and the rights of defendants. Most of the terrorist plots created, supervised, “uncovered,” and stopped by the FBI are fictional, staged events using FBI informants and duped, inept participants. The role of the FBI’s overhyped phony terrorist threats feeds deceitful, fictional narratives, which can lead to indoctrinated and biased judges and courts, undermining the rule of law. The appalling conditions and restrictions that terrorism suspects experience in jail while awaiting trial are meant to break them – psychologically and emotionally. The prospect of excessively long prison sentences, combined with the brutal, austere conditions terror suspects are subjected to while awaiting trial, are meant to encourage suspects to take plea deals, instead of risking a conviction by what they perceive to be a phony case and a biased court. Sentences handed down to terrorist suspects tend to be exceptionally lengthy, due to the reasons stated and other considerations. This enables the FBI and other federal agencies to pressure and steer more suspects into making plea agreements. The FBI is focused on getting plea deals, because they enable the FBI to conceal the illegal and unethical actions and lies they and their informants committed during the case. Reportedly, most terrorism cases in the US never go to trial. The FBI prefers to build cases in a way that will encourage plea agreements from their duped suspects, most of whom are not legitimate terrorist threats. This enables the FBI to conceal the questionable role of informants, including the exorbitant cash incentives and perks paid to informants on their current and previous cases, their criminal history, the crimes they committed for the FBI, and other compromising and embarrassing information. Plea agreements cover up the numerous lies and exaggerations of informants, rather than risk exposure or challenges in court. Failure to expose these lies enables greedy, ethically-challenged informants to keep working on terrorism cases, perfecting their trade, which revolves around deceit, lies, and entrapment. Plea agreements enable the FBI to conceal the fact that virtually all of the fake terrorists would be unable and unwilling to carry out any attacks without the extensive leadership, support, funding, incentives, and assistance from the FBI and their informants. Plea agreements enable FBI officials, complicit and obtuse media outlets, and others to hype the FBI’s tenacity and diligence in protecting US citizens by uncovering and stopping their own phony terrorist plots. FBI officials don’t want to admit the so-called terrorist plots were fictional theatrical skits, in which the FBI scripted the plot, picked the targets, provided harmless weapons, bribed and enticed nonthreatening suspects, and pulled it all together by paying enormous cash incentives to unscrupulous informants. The FBI scripted and produced the terror plot and pimped the players. Plea agreements allow the FBI to conceal the fact that none of the suspects in a case had ever had any contact with any “real” terrorist or insurgent groups, nor were they ever likely to have any contact with any of these groups. Plea agreements better enable the FBI to conceal illegal and unethical activities and entrapments, and the exorbitant amount of taxpayer money used to create these ridiculous, self-glorifying, fictional theatrical productions. Plea deals conceal the fact that some unscrupulous informants are being paid more money per case than many US citizens will make in several years of employment. The FBI does not want the US population to know they had nothing to fear, since the alleged threat was orchestrated and directed by the FBI, including the Hollywood ending in which FBI agents bust the fake terrorist plot they created, seizing the harmless weapons they provided, at a time and location chosen by the FBI, with the objective of garnering good media coverage. The FBI is not disrupting terrorist attacks in the United States, they are creating them. The FBI is the number one sponsor and facilitator of terrorist cells and plots in the United States. It can be said that the FBI is getting very good at “uncovering” and stopping their own terrorist plots. Death Row Exonerations and the FBI’s Criminal Cover-up and Crimes Informants – especially incentivized informants and witnesses – are responsible for wrongful convictions and incarcerations of innocent people. Many of these victims languish for decades in prison, or they’re executed when their death date comes due. These people and their families are destroyed by the lies and deceit of scheming informants, incentivized and empowered by federal and local law enforcement. A study of 111 capital cases in which the death sentence was imposed found that an informant was involved in 46 percent of those that were exonerated in a 30 year period. This reflects the problems of relying upon “incentivized” informants and snitches that include unscrupulous, scheming criminals, who will say or do anything to get cash bonuses and see their current criminal charges or jail sentences reduced or dismissed. In another study of exoneration of 124 death row inmates over a 34 year period, it was determined that two-thirds of them were due to deliberate malfeasance by prosecutors. This is a problem when prosecutors and law enforcement forget their duty is to “uphold” the rule of law, instead of manipulating and abusing it to achieve deceitful objectives and personal victories. This report reflects the dual detriments to the integrity of the criminal justice system – incentivized informants and ethically-challenged police, feds, and prosecutors. The FBI provides very strong incentives for informants and snitches to lie, exaggerate, and play the system. There are many ways they can do this. Informants – especially incentivized informants and witnesses – are responsible for numerous wrongful convictions and incarcerations of innocent people. It appears that the unethical “Anything goes” approach that accompanies FBI terror entrapments and the use of informants and snitches has carried over to the courtroom, where the “Anything goes” approach to getting convictions, further sullies the reputation of the FBI and the integrity of the criminal justice system in the United States. Many wrongfully convicted victims of fake terror plots and other crimes languish for decades in prison, with some innocent inmates being executed. The lives of these people and their families are ruined by the lies and treachery of devious, incentivized informants, who are empowered and encouraged by government agents. The FBI’s Confidential Human Source Policy Guide A publication titled, “THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S GUIDELINES REGARDING THE USE OF CONFIDENTIAL HUMAN SOURCES” provides FBI agents with guidelines as to how they should handle their Confidential Human Sources (CHS), also known as informants and snitches. While this document provides guidance, critics claim the primary purpose of this publication is to provide plausible deniability and deflection, regarding accusations of the illegal and unethical manner in which FBI agents and their CHS’s are operating. FBI agents, informers, and snitches know how to circumvent or ignore the CHS manual, in addition to covering up their illicit and unethical activities. Informants and snitches feel they can rely upon officials in the FBI and other US government agencies to conceal, deny, and deflect any of their lies and criminal activities that are exposed. Like many industries, policies and guidelines are seen as “suggestions,” which can be ignored when they interfere with performance and objectives, especially when the FBI or other agencies are running operations that revolve around informants, entrapments, and stings. Seasoned feds and cops will show others how to operate outside of the guidelines, and how to get away with it during their investigations. In researching and reviewing FBI and Department of Justice (DOJ) documents, I came across a report from the inspector general of the DOJ that found significant problems with the FBI’s compliance with the attorney general’s guidelines on confidential informants, noting that FBI agents and their supervisors had flagrantly ignored these requirements. In 87 percent of 120 cases pulled from FBI offices around the US during an internal audit, FBI agents were in violation of the FBI Confidential Human Source Policy Guide. This is in addition to the numerous times FBI agents and their informants violated procedures, but covered it up to avoid detection. The FBI’s excuse for these embarrassing revelations was that the required paperwork was too complicated for FBI agents to do, but claimed the FBI will try to make it easier for their agents to understand the forms and procedures in the future. The only thing that will likely change is cosmetic corruption by the FBI, to mask irregularities and claim nonexistent improvements. The cases reviewed had multiple violations, including failure to properly access the informant’s suitability for the role before inserting them, failure to properly review the informant’s performance, failure to get authorization for informants who were engaging in illegal activities, failure to tell prosecutors (or the defense and judge) when their informants had committed crimes that were authorized by the FBI, or when they committed crimes not authorized by the FBI, and other violations. It was noted that FBI agents regularly listened in to informants’ conversations without getting preapproval, as required. This enabled agents to help informants manipulate and coerce human prey, including the use of lies and activities that are illegal or in violation of DOJ policies. FBI informants have been committing over 5,000 approved crimes per year, in addition to the thousands of crimes they commit that were not approved. This DOJ report showed that the FBI was issuing retroactive approvals for illegal activities their informants had already committed. This is typical of the FBI, but deplorable for a so-called law enforcement agency. In addition to covering up for the illegal activities of informants, some of these retroactive forms are likely for unethical or illegal activities that FBI agents ordered or “requested” their informants to do, without having the FBI formally involved via a form and paper trail, in case something went wrong. During J. Edgar Hoover’s sordid reign (1924-1972), when FBI agents had already illegally entered a residence, office, or other facility to plant listening devices (bugs), steal documents, and do other nefarious activities – which they referred to as “Black Bag” jobs – they would submit a formal request to enter the premises and plant bugs, with the notation, “Success guaranteed.” This was how agents informed supervisors that the illegal activity had already been successfully accomplished, and the form is just to cover their tracks if any of the evidence gathered goes to trial in the case of criminal investigations, and to cover their tracks when the target was not a criminal. The FBI routinely did “Black Bag” jobs on civil rights and antiwar activists, and other groups, including their offices, leaders, members, and celebrities and others supporting them. Hoover personally destroyed the lives of many innocent US celebrities and citizens. One of the problems is that the Attorney General’s CHS policy are merely guidelines, which FBI agents view as suggestions that can be ignored or covered-up when they prohibit the unethical or illegal activities of agents and informants. FBI officials are aware of this, which is why the AG’s CHS policy’s primary purpose is to provide plausible deniability during congressional investigations or inquiries by the media or defense. If the DOJ and FBI were serious about CHS guidelines – and the proper conduct of FBI agents and CHS – they would address the ongoing egregious violations of federal and local statutes and the FBI policy guide, by initiating internal and criminal consequences to the perpetrators. Violations would generate internal consequences, from diminished employee reviews to suspensions and terminations. They should also initiate public indictments and prosecution of agents and informants for their criminal activities. These suggestions will never happen because the FBI is a duplicitous and incestuous criminal organization that has habitually ignored and violated US laws, constitutional rights, and civil liberties during its one-hundred year history (1924-2024). The FBI’s forerunner origins date to July 26, 1908 (1908 -1923) with the DOJ’s Chief Examiner, Stanley Finch, and 34 agents working out of the Department of Justice. Much of what the FBI says, writes, or does is to enable them to deflect and deny the unethical and criminal behavior of FBI agents, informers, infragard members, contractors, and affiliates involved in entrapments, stings, illegal surveillance, and the organized gang stalking and harassment of perceived FBI enemies and critics. Defense Attorneys, the Courts, and the Media Defense attorneys and the media should ask how many times each respective US government witness has worked as an informant, snitch, or in any other roles involving the surveillance, entrapment, arrest, or prosecution of suspects. Each of these cases should be explored, noting the specifics of the case, the suspects, the jurisdiction, and other details, including all forms of compensation, transcripts of their previous testimonies, and recordings or videos, if they are available. Skilled individuals can analyze recordings, videos, and transcripts to spot lies and deceptions. They can also note informant’s repetitive, rehearsed statements and testimony used on multiple cases. The feds’ move some successful informants around the country, using them to entice and entrap others. Defense attorneys should expose and investigate all of these cases – including all of the incentives and compensation received and criminal charges and sentences reduced – sharing details with the court and the media, within legal guidelines. Soliciting this information from unscrupulous informants and snitches while they are under oath is another option that may generate perjury charges against them, when they get tripped up by their lies. The specific activities and roles of the informant or snitch should be revealed for each case, along with a detailed breakdown of how much they were compensated financially for services, bonuses, expenses, and all other creative payments, reimbursements, and considerations, which can include compensation that is delayed or diverted. Line item accountability and explanation of expenses should be provided, since this is one of the primary ways payments to CHS have been illegally hidden. The defense also wants to know about other incentives received, including a reduction or elimination of criminal sentences, jail or prison sentences, and other considerations. Every single case the CHS informant or snitch worked on should be investigated and dissected in detail, including specific accusations and charges against the accused, and full transcripts of the testimony given by informants and snitches in each case. Defense attorneys should also ask how many crimes the respective informant has committed both with, and without, FBI approval. These numbers will be revealing, since FBI informants have been committing over 5,000 approved crimes per year, in addition to the thousands of crimes they commit without approval. One of the things I’ve spotted in these and similar cases, is that some informants and snitches perform like actors in a recurring role for these FBI theatrical productions of terrorism plots and other cases. Informants and snitches fabricate or exaggerate stories and regurgitate the scripts they and their handlers created. A review of their statements, reports, and testimony will reveal that some of them use virtually the same or similar statements, stories, accusations, and observations from one case to another. There are several ways to expedite this search to provide comparisons and matches. These cases can then be reviewed with CHS informants and snitches in front of a judge and jury, revealing the similarities of their fabricated, scripted, and rehearsed lies, statements, and testimony. This can be followed up by showing the money, expenses, reduced sentences, and other compensation and perks they received on each case. This will enable the judge, jury, media, and public to see the flaws of the informant’s testimony, devious drivers and incentives encouraging their deceit, and the criminal and ethical travesty playing out in FBI terrorism cases that sullies the rule of law. Creating a Data Depository Every time a federal agency’s informants and snitches illegal and unethical activities are exposed, their name, along with the respective jurisdiction, information, and downloads of all the relevant files and specifics, should be posted in regional and national defense attorney depositories so that other attorneys handling federal cases can easily find and use the available information to get the respective informants and snitches thrown off the case. This can also include illicit informant activity at state and local jurisdictions. The other option is to leave the compromised informant or snitch on the case, so they can be exposed in front of a judge and jury. The public unraveling, with potential perjury charges and lots of media coverage, will provide much needed exposure of the illicit and unethical activities of the FBI and other US government agencies, and state and local jurisdictions. Critics claim the FBI are addicted to media coverage. The ongoing negative media coverage they get from their illicit and unethical activities involving informants and entrapments, may help cure that. Eventually, some of these scheming, lying informants and snitches will be neutralized and prevented from working on any cases for the FBI or other jurisdictions. Their continued exposure and prohibited usage will help accomplish many things, including: 1. It will remove these unscrupulous lying informants and snitches from being used. 2. Each time they are denounced and removed adds more exposure and ridicule of the FBI, which could lead to a much-needed congressional investigation, media inquiries, elimination of the FBI’s fictional terrorism plots, and the decision to form a new agency to handle all domestic terrorism issues, removing all these responsibilities from the FBI. 3. As scores of FBI and other US government informers and snitches are exposed and terminated, losing lucrative paydays, they become ripe and ready recruits to find a new purpose in helping defense attorneys and investigators, congressional investigations, and the media learn more about the illegal and unethical inner workings of the FBI and other US government agencies on terrorism cases and other investigations and trials. 4. All of the findings from the FBI’s fraudulent, ethically-compromised terrorism cases could encourage defense attorneys, investigators, alternative media, and US Congress to launch investigations into the extensive illegal and unethical activities of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). National Security Agency (NSA), and other US government agencies that have been blatantly operating like Gestapo and Stasi agencies, trampling US constitutional rights, civil liberties, and the rule of law. Summary The $3 billion annual supplemental budget that the US Congress has been allocating to the FBI for counterterrorism operations is being used to increase the Stasi-like surveillance, harassment, and organized gang stalking of law-abiding US citizens, who pose no threat of terrorism or violence. These innocent people – who include academics, journalists, current and former US government employees and soldiers, celebrities, activists, and others – are being targeted by the FBI for their constitutionally protected statements and activities, if they are critical or questioning of US policies, from abusive surveillance and erosion of civil liberties to the flawed policy of endless wars. There are no significant terrorist cells operating in the United States, nor significant terrorist threats from abroad. If any evolve, it’s unlikely the core of arrogant, marginalized officials at the FBI could find them, access and understand their networks and operations, and anticipate and predict their future activities. This is why the FBI has over 15,000 informants, 80,000 civilian infragard members, and continually threatens and abuses Muslims to become informants. This is the way the FBI compensates for their chronic deficiencies and lack of talent, from obtuse, self-absorbed high ranking officials to many of those assigned to the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division and other sectors, including the FBI lab that handles their own cases, and receives over 20,000 submission per year from police departments and federal agencies across the US. As Dr. Frederic Whitehurst, the former FBI Laboratory Supervisory Special Agent noted upon joining the lab, the FBI allowed evidence to become contaminated, and he discovered that many lab techs lacked proper training and credentials. Dr. Whitehurst also noted that FBI techs were deliberately skewing and altering DNA and other evidence on their reports to favor the prosecution. Some techs also changed the analysis reports of other techs – without authorization or notification – to cause innocent suspects to appear guilty – facilitating wrongful convictions and plea agreements. Rosemary Dew, a former FBI Special Agent, wrote a book titled “Your FBI,” that includes Dr. Whitehurst’s experiences, along with those of 14 other FBI Whistleblowers. Throughout their history, most of the FBI’s successes in each of the sectors they handle – from bank robberies and organized crime to terrorism – were achieved through illegal activities and listening devices, coupled with thousands of bribed informants and compromised criminals, instead of the implicit knowledge, skill, and activities of FBI agents. The FBI has had some highly competent, dedicated agents, but they are working in a quagmire of institutional incompetence, corruption, and treachery. Historically, the FBI has always had a mix of arrogant, incompetent, and unethical officials and agents, operating in a highly toxic, politicized working environment that has greatly diminished the FBI’s character, capacity, and reputation. The FBI undermines constitutional ideals and ethical and effective law enforcement. This has been exposed by FBI whistleblowers, congressional investigations, and other revelations and reports. Hucksters and charlatans at the FBI are relentlessly lying to US government officials, the media, and the population, exaggerating terrorism threats that were planned, funded, supplied, and led by the FBI and their informants. The CHS are paid enormous amounts of money to entice indigent and inept dupes – who have never had any ties to terrorism – to participate in phony FBI skits for the purpose of trying to justify the $3 billion additional funding the FBI gets annually, while creating the impression the FBI is competent. The FBI wants to create the absurd illusion that numerous terrorist cells are continually planning attacks on the US, and that the FBI is very good at stopping them. FBI officials have been desperate to hype the threat of terrorism to increase fears among US government leaders and the population, so they don’t notice that there are very few people who could be called real terrorists in the US, and that the FBI has been scamming everyone since 9/11 with ongoing fictional terrorist plots. Critics claim the FBI repeatedly sullies the rule of law to lend credibility to their flawed, fictional terrorists’ cases, which they initiate, finance, lead, and support, before stopping their own plots to reap flattering media coverage and public acclaim. When US government agencies list the potential terrorist groups “threatening” the United States, they should put the FBI at the top of the list, since they have initiated, funded, supplied, and led most of the terrorism plots in the US since 9/11. FBI officials are consumed with creating the illusion they are competent at counterterrorism, but it’s time for US taxpayers to stop funding the FBI’s deceitful, self-serving terrorism charades. The evidence clearly shows that the FBI’s counterterrorism budget – funded by US taxpayers – went to providing lucrative bribes and payoffs to unscrupulous and unethical informants, who were motivated by massive financial rewards for manipulating and entrapping nonthreatening victims, who in turn, were motivated by the financial rewards promised them, along with other perks and benefits. The most common characteristics shared by all of the dupes entrapped by FBI terrorism scams is their mental health issues and financial problems. It’s not their terrorism links, since none of them have ever had any ties or interactions with actual terrorists. As Mike German, a former FBI Special Agent, who worked on counterterrorism for 14 years, notes, the people being targeted and entrapped by the FBI are not major threats, having diminished capacity, with most of them having no access to weapons unless they are provided to them by the FBI. Mike German said, “When the FBI undercover agent or informant is the only purported link to a real terrorist group, supplies the motive, designs the plot and provides all the weapons, one has to question whether they [FBI] are combating terrorism or creating it.” The FBI’s counterterrorism funding should be substantially decreased, since they are using most of it to create phony terrorism plots or to stalk and harass nonthreatening, law-abiding US citizens. The long-term solution is to follow the recommendations of competent officials, and take all of the counterterrorism responsibilities away from the FBI and give them to a new agency, which unlike the FBI, will be competent, ethical, and focused on finding real threats, instead of creating scores of phony ones. I’ve been putting together compelling research, back-stories, and other information on Asif Merchant – the Pakistani recently charged in an alleged plot – and the cast of characters, events, and misinformation surrounding him and the plot. I have extensive research and contacts, but if anyone has additional stories or information to share on this or any other topics, they can contact me at Pashtunwali1987@gmail.com The specific source and information provided can remain anonymous and unpublished, if desired, but it will provide beneficial contextual framing for the other material I am working on for future articles.