This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
Sting operations are common in America. Other countries like Sweden and the Netherlands ban them. Every nation should because usually they're used lawlessly to entrap.
However, on December 10, Holder publicly defended them, New York Times writers Malia Wollan and Charlie Savage headlining, "Holder Calls Terrorism Sting Operations Essential," saying:
Addressing a San Francisco area Muslim audience, he called "the tactic (an) 'essential law enforcement tool in uncovering and preventing terror attacks,' " despite using them to entrap. Attendees weren't pleased.
Farhana Khera, President of Muslim Advocates, a legal advocacy/civil rights organization (the event sponsor) said entrapment operations "may be getting people involved in (alleged) terrorism who otherwise would not have done anything." These operations also divert investigators from actual threats and provoke widespread anti-Muslim sentiment, she added.
Council on American-Islam Relations spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper, said:
"We maintain concerns about FBI policies regarding informants in mosques and provocateurs in our community" up to no good. "There's a sense of being under siege in many Muslim communities. People just assume there are agents or informants in their mosque now. It's a fact of life."
Moreover, few believe the FBI claiming their tactics prevented numerous post-9/11 attacks. They did not.
A recent case shows why, one enraging California Muslims. On December 5, Washington Post writer Jerry Markon explained, headlining "Tension grows between Calif. Muslims, FBI after informant infiltrates mosque," saying:
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
