Eland writes: "The mass shooting in Orlando, Florida at a gay nightclub, by
a man pledging a seemingly last-minute allegiance to the ISIS terror group,
leads to questions about whether the U.S. government has been adequately
protecting its citizens."
Smoke-filled skies loom over a destroyed tank on the south side of Baghdad.
(photo: Carolyn Cole/LA Times)
How US Wars Have Bred Terrorism
By Ivan Eland, Consortium News
25 June 16
The Reagan administration inadvertently created Al Qaeda by arming the
Afghan mujahedeen in the 1980s, then George W. Bush's Iraq War gave rise to
ISIS. So, one might draw a lesson about overusing military force abroad,
says Ivan Eland.
he mass shooting in Orlando, Florida at a gay nightclub, by a man pledging
a seemingly last-minute allegiance to the ISIS terror group, leads to
questions about whether the U.S. government has been adequately protecting
its citizens.
Going back in time, the U.S. government inadvertently created Al Qaeda by
encouraging, funding, and arming radical Islamist fighters against the
Soviet Union in faraway Afghanistan during the 1980s. After the 9/11 attacks
by that group, the U.S. government, by conducting an unrelated invasion of
Iraq, then unintentionally created an even more brutal group called Al Qaeda
in Iraq, which pledged allegiance to the main Al Qaeda group in Pakistan,
and eventually morphed into the even more vicious ISIS. ISIS then took over
large parts of Iraq and Syria, but began to attack Western targets only
after a U.S.-led coalition began bombing the group in those countries.
Directly planned attacks by ISIS have occurred in Europe, but ISIS has had
problems recruiting people in the United States to go to Syria for military
training and return to the United States to attack, because its Muslim
community has not been radicalized. Thus, the group has had to rely often on
spontaneous and crude - but nevertheless sometimes deadly - attacks by
relative amateurs "inspired" by the group, such as the incidents in San
Bernardino and Orlando.
In the Orlando attack, the perpetrator, Omar Mateen, even may have been
dressing up anti-gay bigotry by pledging allegiance to ISIS shortly after he
began his dastardly act. Although the FBI had investigated his past
statements and connection with one of the few Americans who joined an Al
Qaeda affiliate and went to Syria in 2013 and 2014, respectively, they
closed the investigation; Mateen's father and ex-wife have both dismissed
religion and instead pointed to anti-gay statements he had made. His father
has even pointed out that the shooting may have been triggered by Mateen's
outrage at his three-year-old son recently observing two men kissing and
touching.
Entrapping 'Terrorists'
According to a recent investigation by The New York Times, in two-thirds of
prosecutions of ISIS-related terrorism cases, the FBI is using once rare
undercover sting operations, such as going on the Internet and encouraging
bloviating and bragging individuals to do illegal things so that they can be
arrested. Unbelievably, the reason for such a high percentage is that such
intrusive undercover operations can be done without approval of judge, which
is needed for searches and wiretaps. Thus, the Congress and the public are
largely in the dark about such stings.
According to Michael German, a former undercover agent with the FBI, who was
quoted in the Times, "They're manufacturing terrorism cases. These people
are five steps away from being a danger to the United States."
Such furtive entrapment is good for the FBI, so that the agency can show
that funding the agency results in arrests in terrorism cases, but is bad
for the republic. Because talk is cheap and doesn't necessarily coincide
with action, the FBI (and other law enforcement agencies) likely may be
egging people on to do things they wouldn't do without such encouragement.
Even more important, the FBI may be wasting time arresting relatively
harmless braggarts who have discovered ISIS on the Internet or on TV while
ignoring others - ISIS-related or not - who may be more dangerous. Most
important, such undercover operations alienate an otherwise cooperative
American Muslim community, which could quit providing the FBI intelligence
on any really dangerous people.
In the panic that ensued after the 9/11 attacks, the FBI was transformed to
focus on terrorism cases rather than its traditional concentration on more
"ordinary" federal crimes. And since the advent of ISIS, the agency seems to
have focused like a laser on the group.
As the San Bernardino and Orlando incidents seem to show, even an "inspired"
lone wolf can kill significant numbers of people, if not masses of people as
on 9/11. Yet the school shootings at Virginia Tech and Sandy Hook have
killed about as many, and anyone can now kill people for reasons of hate and
simply dress up their motivations by pledging allegiance to ISIS, which the
Orlando murderer may well have done.
Despite the hysteria that occurs when ISIS is somehow associated with
incidents like San Bernardino and Orlando, Americans should keep in mind
that their government inadvertently created the group in the first place and
is now hyping the danger to get more resources for its agencies, such as the
FBI and Department of Defense, to combat the problem.
The Orlando tragedy is horrendous, but Americans should put the threat from
ISIS in perspective and not allow the security agencies to run rogue and
either stir up more terrorism from overseas or undermine the republic by
using entrapment techniques that are counterproductive to protecting the
public.
________________________________________
Ivan Eland is senior fellow and director of the Center on Peace & Liberty at
the Independent Institute, Oakland, CA, and the author of Recarving
Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Smoke-filled skies loom over a destroyed tank on the south side of Baghdad.
(photo: Carolyn Cole/LA Times)
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/22/how-us-wars-have-fed-terrorism/https:/
/consortiumnews.com/2016/06/22/how-us-wars-have-fed-terrorism/
How US Wars Have Bred Terrorism
By Ivan Eland, Consortium News
25 June 16
The Reagan administration inadvertently created Al Qaeda by arming the
Afghan mujahedeen in the 1980s, then George W. Bush's Iraq War gave rise to
ISIS. So, one might draw a lesson about overusing military force abroad,
says Ivan Eland.
he mass shooting in Orlando, Florida at a gay nightclub, by a man pledging
a seemingly last-minute allegiance to the ISIS terror group, leads to
questions about whether the U.S. government has been adequately protecting
its citizens.
Going back in time, the U.S. government inadvertently created Al Qaeda by
encouraging, funding, and arming radical Islamist fighters against the
Soviet Union in faraway Afghanistan during the 1980s. After the 9/11 attacks
by that group, the U.S. government, by conducting an unrelated invasion of
Iraq, then unintentionally created an even more brutal group called Al Qaeda
in Iraq, which pledged allegiance to the main Al Qaeda group in Pakistan,
and eventually morphed into the even more vicious ISIS. ISIS then took over
large parts of Iraq and Syria, but began to attack Western targets only
after a U.S.-led coalition began bombing the group in those countries.
Directly planned attacks by ISIS have occurred in Europe, but ISIS has had
problems recruiting people in the United States to go to Syria for military
training and return to the United States to attack, because its Muslim
community has not been radicalized. Thus, the group has had to rely often on
spontaneous and crude - but nevertheless sometimes deadly - attacks by
relative amateurs "inspired" by the group, such as the incidents in San
Bernardino and Orlando.
In the Orlando attack, the perpetrator, Omar Mateen, even may have been
dressing up anti-gay bigotry by pledging allegiance to ISIS shortly after he
began his dastardly act. Although the FBI had investigated his past
statements and connection with one of the few Americans who joined an Al
Qaeda affiliate and went to Syria in 2013 and 2014, respectively, they
closed the investigation; Mateen's father and ex-wife have both dismissed
religion and instead pointed to anti-gay statements he had made. His father
has even pointed out that the shooting may have been triggered by Mateen's
outrage at his three-year-old son recently observing two men kissing and
touching.
Entrapping 'Terrorists'
According to a recent investigation by The New York Times, in two-thirds of
prosecutions of ISIS-related terrorism cases, the FBI is using once rare
undercover sting operations, such as going on the Internet and encouraging
bloviating and bragging individuals to do illegal things so that they can be
arrested. Unbelievably, the reason for such a high percentage is that such
intrusive undercover operations can be done without approval of judge, which
is needed for searches and wiretaps. Thus, the Congress and the public are
largely in the dark about such stings.
According to Michael German, a former undercover agent with the FBI, who was
quoted in the Times, "They're manufacturing terrorism cases. These people
are five steps away from being a danger to the United States."
Such furtive entrapment is good for the FBI, so that the agency can show
that funding the agency results in arrests in terrorism cases, but is bad
for the republic. Because talk is cheap and doesn't necessarily coincide
with action, the FBI (and other law enforcement agencies) likely may be
egging people on to do things they wouldn't do without such encouragement.
Even more important, the FBI may be wasting time arresting relatively
harmless braggarts who have discovered ISIS on the Internet or on TV while
ignoring others - ISIS-related or not - who may be more dangerous. Most
important, such undercover operations alienate an otherwise cooperative
American Muslim community, which could quit providing the FBI intelligence
on any really dangerous people.
In the panic that ensued after the 9/11 attacks, the FBI was transformed to
focus on terrorism cases rather than its traditional concentration on more
"ordinary" federal crimes. And since the advent of ISIS, the agency seems to
have focused like a laser on the group.
As the San Bernardino and Orlando incidents seem to show, even an "inspired"
lone wolf can kill significant numbers of people, if not masses of people as
on 9/11. Yet the school shootings at Virginia Tech and Sandy Hook have
killed about as many, and anyone can now kill people for reasons of hate and
simply dress up their motivations by pledging allegiance to ISIS, which the
Orlando murderer may well have done.
Despite the hysteria that occurs when ISIS is somehow associated with
incidents like San Bernardino and Orlando, Americans should keep in mind
that their government inadvertently created the group in the first place and
is now hyping the danger to get more resources for its agencies, such as the
FBI and Department of Defense, to combat the problem.
The Orlando tragedy is horrendous, but Americans should put the threat from
ISIS in perspective and not allow the security agencies to run rogue and
either stir up more terrorism from overseas or undermine the republic by
using entrapment techniques that are counterproductive to protecting the
public.
Ivan Eland is senior fellow and director of the Center on Peace & Liberty at
the Independent Institute, Oakland, CA, and the author of Recarving
Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
