Orchestrating its Own Terrorism Plots

FBI Using the Same Fear Tactic From the First War on Terror: Orchestrating its Own Terrorism Plots

So central to this plot were those acting at the behest of the FBI that many of the accused plotters only met each other because of meetings arranged at the direction of the FBI, who targeted them based on social media postings and other political activities that suggested anti-government and anti-Whitmer sentiments which could be exploited:

A longtime government informant from Wisconsin, for example, helped organize a series of meetings around the country where many of the alleged plotters first met one another and the earliest notions of a plan took root, some of those people say. The Wisconsin informant even paid for some hotel rooms and food as an incentive to get people to come.

One of the FBI's informants, a former Iraq War soldier, “became so deeply enmeshed in a Michigan militant group that he rose to become its second-in-command.” With his leadership role in one of the key groups, and all while acting under the direction of the FBI, he was “encouraging members to collaborate with other potential suspects and paying for their transportation to meetings.” Indeed, he even “prodded the alleged mastermind of the kidnapping plot to advance his plan, then baited the trap that led to the arrest.”
Joe Biden also made repeated use of this storyline. Appearing at a campaign rally in Michigan on October 16, the Democratic candidate blasted Trump for the crime of continuing to criticize Whitmer even after she was the target of a terror plot. He explicitly blamed Trump for having incited it: “When the president tweeted 'Liberate Michigan, Liberate Michigan,' that's the call that was heard. That was the dog whistle." And he accused Trump of purposely stoking a wave of the worst kind of terrorism on U.S. soil: “it's the sort of behavior you might expect from ISIS,” he said of the accused.
But the value of depicting Trump as having incited a frightening terrorist attack just weeks before the election, and the zeal to feed the broader narrative pushed by the U.S. security state that anti-government extremism is America's greatest national security threat, drowned out any skepticism. The storyline was clear and unquestioned: Trump was inciting ISIS-like terrorism on U.S. soil and right-wing extremists, who would fester even after Trump was done, were the primary menace that requires new domestic powers and larger budgets in order to defeat.

It is this long history and mountain of evidence that compels an investigation into the role played by the FBI in the planning of the 1/6 riot at the Capitol. And it is that same evidence that made the corporate media's derisive reaction to such demands — as voiced by Darren Beattie's Revolver News, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson and myself — so ignorant and subservient. They acted as if only some unhinged conspiracy theorist could possibly believe that the FBI would have informants and agents embedded in the groups that planned that Capitol riot rather than what it is: the only logical conclusion for anyone who knows how the FBI actually behaves.

Indeed, the BuzzFeed reporters who investigated the FBI's key role in the Michigan case must have been very disturbed by what they found since they used their reporting to raise that taboo topic: what role did the FBI have in 1/6? Moreover, they asked, is this yet another era where the FBI is targeting Americans not for criminality but for their political views, and then orchestrating their own plots that justify the U.S. security state's massive budget and unlimited powers?

This is written out of context so read at the source for the full effect.


One reply:

Can someone get a message back to him and let him know his leader is enjoying the omelette bar at his resort.

I remember when shitlibs cared about unjust prisons and agreed that keeping them in solitary confinement was torture. Just one of the many issues that have been pretzelized in their brains.

Trump is going to skate on creating the tension around the election and especially he has some responsibility for what happened at the capital. But he’s not the only one who should be answering some questions.

1- Why weren’t the capital police prepared for the event? Did they think that the Trump supporters would just go to Trump’s speech or did they believe that they would stay peaceful like they have in the past? They even joined together in some cities.

2- Did the FBI and other intelligence agencies drop the ball and not prepare or was there something more nefarious about the whole event?

3- Pelosi is supposedly in charge of the capital security so why didn’t she make sure that it would be safe?

4- The capital police knew that people were trying to break into the building so why did they wait until the last minute to get congress safe? Especially the Vice President who was only saved by a quick thinking cop. OMG they almost got the nuclear football! Blehh.

5- Tons more, but I doubt we’ll ever get the answers to many, many questions. Was Trump the patsy for not only the capital riots, but for many other issues that are easy to see and others hidden. This might be the most important answer of them all.

9 users have voted.


for Democrats really planning a coup. A silent coup enforced by election fraud.

Was Trump the patsy for not only the capital riots, but for many other issues that are easy to see and others hidden.

6 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Watching the Watchmen (Have seen numerous references to it in essays and comments but never saw a link for it.) It's long and well worth reading.

It is exactly like the same shit the FBI did to entrap young, naive, not too bright Muslims (or wannabe Muslims) after 9/11. Those poor schmucks got locked up for a long time for nothing they could possibly have concocted much less executed on their own. A major point on this, when the FBI runs such scams, the plot gets exposed and the so called culprits locked up before any actual damage is done. Not that any of those plots are formulated well enough to succeed if they had been allowed to proceed, but there's always a risk of some damage or injury when a bunch of people think they're in on some mission.

wrt your questions, DC cops, etc. expected a march to the Capitol to be similar to what had happened at the MI Capitol in the spring of 2020. Only far less threatening because the MI protestors were armed. In that event, the cops stood down, the protestors were let into the building and allowed to blow off some steam, no shots fired, no damage, and everyone went home.

#4 - the cops weren't prepared logistically and with manpower to repel a mob breaking into the building. That was unexpected. It wasn't until they breached the locked doors that there was an "oh, shit" moment for security. However, as all those in the building were safely escorted to secure locations, everyday security measures in the building proved to be quite adequate.

As FBI plots are never intended to go live, I don't sense that 1/6 was planned by FBI folks. To me it didn't look planned and was more a rallying cry -- 'stop the steal' or whatever. Mobs with heightened emotions aren't so easy to predict.

Don't construe anything I've said to mean I'm not supportive of a full investigation into the FBI and DC cops activities before, during, and after 1/6. There were surely under cover government assets within the crowd, but if so, they either weren't situationally aware enough to recognize early that the crowd was more out of control and determined than expected or they suck at mob control. From the video clips I've seen, everyone, including the protestors, seemed dazed by what happened.

btw -- I have no empathy for the yahoos. Getting one's ass to DC to support a billionaire bozo who couldn't care less about their asses and willing to use violence to interrupt a process for a few hours is the height of stupidity.

3 users have voted.
zed2's picture

This is a common tactic of the Clintonites, used for making issues toxic by falely associating similar sounding issues with trump. This made me suspect that trump had been put up to the whole thing to hide important issues liike the huge threat the GATS posed to (once) public services like Medicare and Social Security. Also, the outsourcing of possibly tens of million good public jobs via the WTO's GATS Mode Four.

These jobs were allegedly promised other countries body shop firms in exchange for their rubber stamping IP rights which they really could not afford. (especially todeay in this pandemic)

In the light of the pandemic the timings of all these things makes me wonder if there is any chance that for example, the 9-11-2001 incident might have had a hidden purpose as providing an excuse to use "national security" to push the similar sounding WTO "agreement" that nobody would ever agree with out of the news, the terror incident was only a month before the failed Doha WTO Minesterial. What happened at Doha? People will have to ask and get their versions o events, of which there are many. Many say they are setting up a new system of "modern day slavery" along a Middle Eastern model ("kafala").

Its not work without pay, its voluntary and the highest of the two countries minimum wages may apply. (But thats being challenged by the poor countries who claim their extreely low wages are thgei biggest competitive advantage asn so should be legal, since we signed this agreement prohibiting domestic laws and regulations, rules that imposed quotas or numerical limits minimum wages from applying , or limits on numbers of healthcare payers. Our laws may act like trade barriers.
What is a control fraud? The movie The Producers, depicts one. Its a kind of fraud thats common under kleptocracy. zthe S&L scandal in the 1990s and the BCCI fraud in the UK offshore world of former British colonies and the City of London, were both huge multi billion dollar control frauds.

If the terror incident was indeed used to delay the services liberalization and prolong a fraud, (and the visas it involved) off the to do list for quite a while that would be absolutely horrible but unsurprising. After all they made promises that, were they kept would bankrupt a large percentage of the workers in the country. Perhaps as many as 25% of our jobs in this country might be outsourced under the WTO commitments that already exist, no matter how bad things got we could not cut back on the number because the (arguably anti-democracy "Agreement" 's circular logic specifically prohibits that. . There is no disputing that the GATS is tremendously controversial, but we Americans have not heard any of this controversy here in the US. Significantly we've also witnessed huge amounts of energy being poured into an elaborate cover up using a popular politician and a platform thats indisputably a route to a successful health care reform but unfortunately explicitly barred by GATS putting them off the table as a cover up strategy. hiding the GATS and the restrictions on policy it represents. A "bullshit promise" unlikely to be kept for that reason. In fact if we used regulations that violate GATS - sch as anything that reduced health insurers. Because we promised to keep all FS regulation essentially the same in 1998, forever? Well, the GATS does not expire.The high profits and cutthroat policies of the past are supposed to be locked in. profits are locked in.,For the investors.

would likely end up with our receiving punitive sanctions. South Africa is io the same situation, due to the GATS commitments left on it by the departing apartheid government more than 27 years ago, now even though the country voted overwhelmingly for healthcare reform more than 20 years ago the government has been unable to get out of the GATS trap. Will the same happen to us? It seems likely, maybe even inevitable.

How many Americans would vote to endanger both Medicare and SociaL Security or "standstill" any kind of effective healthcare reform at the 1998 level of regulation, an era when all sorts of nasty practices were the rule not the exception in health insurance and a third of the people in the country had an uninsurable member in their family exposing them to certain bankruptcy if they got a serious disease like cancer, a disease that increasing in humans due to the increase in bio-persistent endocrine disruption in our environment, exposures that are already causing an explosion in certain diseases as well as metabolic syndrome, diabetes, prostate and breast cancers, and morbid obesity and so on. These are expensive illnesses, This is no time to be signing treaties that make health care less and less affordable.

But our current trade policy defaults do that. All we have to do is stay on the autopilot path we are already on.

We Americans not only don't understand what was done in 1993 and 1994 and its implications to our economic futures and our entire world's direction, we also don't understand the horrifying implications of services liberalization to us. (The creation of a race to the bottom) our wages and our direction in the world. Particularly we would not want the US to be the global opponent of public services we have become. For example, the privatization of other countries once-public healthcare, higher education, water, etc. That's not what we want, but its our official position now, one which its hard to see even a simple majority agreeing with. .

They claim its to help the poor. It decidedly does not help the poor, it helps these who oppress them , all around the world, by helping the most wealthy firms in LDCs get even wealthier by outsourcing good jobs to whomever will do them the cheapest.

That especially is opposed by all of us. Then why are our new "next generation (negative list) trade deals trying to force what we are still trying to claim is a perfectly adequate system on other countries, an assertion based on big lies. Were trying to force it on other countries.

I am not saying our own people represented we the peoples desires or interests when they entered us into these permanent commitments which have no expiration dates, They didn't, obviously.

No I am saying they did not and do not represent us and also these alleged debts represent odious debt, that should be null and void as they were put there by frauds that our political class are now trying to hush up. In part using Trump as a deliberate issue poisoner, and deliberate distraction, A reality TV professional.

They may hold positions of power but their acts speak to the fact that they are now extremists. That fact is also now largely undisputed in mainstream economics, its called hyper-globalization, and Dani Rodrik's political trilemma of the global economy. The economics press writing on the Trilemma shows that its in direct conflict with democracy - How do we get out? Ask USTR, they will point you to GATS Article 21, a procedure where we would have to buy back our nations right to regulate by trading items with equivalent value to other WTO Members. This may be insanely expensive. How did this debt we now owe get created I want to know. Who did the trade benefit? Certainly not most of us.

Something is seriously wrong at the top and it represents a 30 year long conspiracy (it began 15-20, 1986 at Punta Del Este) against the Constitution and against the people of the US to steal our rights and high perceived value recently public services jobs and convert them into wealth for the very rich and losses for the rest of us. In fact it is even explained as being a massive redistribution of wealth with connections to the Third World Debt in a UN document from the time. What exactly was going on there?

Was some kind of deal made to create a control fraud, a form of looting..seems to be a big risk of the corruption neoliberalism is known to create.

" leaving the nation with debts that people would duffer greatly for. It seems that India is obsessed by this debt which they would prefer we accepted their assertions that its owed directly to THEMK, and not the lowest bidder LDC firms, because India is no longer an LDC, and many of its people (the ones who would benefit are notorious for their corruption and are terribly rich. They are far better off than the Americans whose jobs they want to be replacing. Additionally, the transaction has the smell of fraud, and our government seems likely to want this deal for cheap labor a lot, because of the powerful corporate lobbies pushing for it in order to drastically undercut wages in skilled professions.

GATS and the WTO are a huge filthy scam on the whole world, that props up illegitimate gains by the ultra rich. And protects their money stashed all around the world in a growing web of former British colonies that have been corrupted and which now are tax havens.

These financial scammers likr BCCI invariably have had close relationships with the financial cartels and the terrorists, often long before they became known to be terrorists. These terrorists often had close relationsips with the same banks.


2 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture


In part using Trump as a deliberate issue poisoner, and deliberate distraction, A reality TV professional.

I thought so too and believed it after reading Kissinger's article that told the direction the country was going with Trump in charge instead of Hillary. The reality TV show host patsy.

2 users have voted.

In a free country civil liberties are not only for certain groups.
So this is how liberty dies . . . with thunderous applause.
The donor class doesn’t want it, and Americans elect the bribed. So suck it up.