MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

In Bowling Green 'Massacre,' FBI Agents Foiled an FBI Terror Plot

A 2011 "terrorist plot" in Kentucky is oft used to warn against Muslim refugees. But the only terrorists in this case were manufactured by the FBI.

Hammadi and AlwanHammadi and AlwanFresh off of making-up a massacre on national television, Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway has been trying to rationalize her rhetoric—a rant about how the media didn't cover Obama's refugee ban after the "Bowling Green Massacre" of 2011—by claiming that what she meant to say was "Bowling Green terrorists." While there may not have been a terrorist "massacre"—or any terrorist violence at all—in Bowling Green, Kentucky, there was a terrorist plot uncovered, Conway noted Friday on Twitter, quickly shifting the spotlight back to the supposed danger posed by Islamic refugees.

Conway is correct about a few things: there were two Bowling Green men arrested for terrorism; they were Iraqis who had come to the U.S. through a refugee resettlement program; and their story did prompt then-President Obama to slow or suspend Iraqi-refugee immigration for around six months. But there are a few other key things to keep in mind about this Bowling Green "terrorist plot"...

1. It was concocted entirely by the FBI.

The young men involved, Waad Ramadan Alwan and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, had come to the U.S. in 2009 as part of a program for displaced Iraqis. Once settled in Kentucky, the men were solicited by undercover FBI agents to help them send money and weapons to militants back in Iraq.

In August 2010, a confidential FBI informant first met with Alwan and "represented to Alwan that he was working with a group to ship money and weapons to Mujahadeen in Iraq," according to an FBI statement. From that fall through the following spring, the FBI informant invited Alwan to participate in 10 operations to send weapons or money to Iraq. Hammadi joined in the efforts, recruited by Alwan, in January 2011. Throughout the operations, the FBI supplied all materials and took care of all logistics for the imaginary operation, with Alwan and Hammadi merely offering manpower.

Despite the FBI's then-assertion that Alwan and Hammadi were just the tip of the terrorist-cell iceberg in small-town Kentucky, the agency never found additional terrorist agents in the area.

2. It did not involve plans to attack in the U.S.

Back in Iraq, Alwan and Hammadi had been involved efforts to fight off invading U.S. soldiers during the early days of the Iraq war, according to what they told undercover officials. But throughout their interactions with undercover FBI agents in 2010 and 2011, Alwan and Hammadi never discussed plans to attack anyone or cause destruction on U.S. soil. And while they were found guilty of attempting to provide material support to al Qaeda militants back in Iraq, the men never indicated that they were personally in contact with any militants, attempted to procure weapons for such individuals, or attempted to provide any of their own money to such individuals. Rather, they showed up when and where the FBI informant told them to and helped physically load decoy supplies into whatever they were allegedly being shipped from. (For more on the FBI's history of manufacturing terrorists like this, see here.)

3. It's in rare company.

According to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, only three of the 784,000 refugees cleared for U.S. resettlement since 2001—the two Bowling Green men and a male refugee from Uzbekistan—have been arrested for terrorism or plotting terrorist acts. The Uzbek man, Fazliddin Kurbanov, had come here with his parents as Christian refugees who were being persecuted for their religion in Uzbekistan. But once in the U.S. for a few years, Kurbanov converted to Islam. He was convicted in 2015 for possessing unregistered explosives and attempting to provide money and computer support to the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. Kurbanov was sentenced to 25 years in federal prison. Hammadi was sentenced to life in prison, and Alwan to 40 years.

As Ronald Bailey noted here in 2015, there have been several other terrorism arrests attributed to refugees, such as the Tsarnaev brothers, better known as the Boston Marathon bombers. But the Tsarnaev brothers weren't admitted to the U.S. as refugees but as the minor children of adults granted asylum. "The distinction between refugees and asylees is not just a legal technicality," explains Bailey. "Aslyees are self-selected—they show up at or within the border and apply for asylum. As long as the asylum application is pending, they cannot be thrown out of the country. In contrast, refugees are generally designated as such by U.N. officials, and they usually live in refugee camps. They go through a vetting process that takes up to two or three years."

There may be slightly more rogue refugees than the Migration Policy Institute estimates. There was also Mohamed Osman Mohamud, "the would-be Portland Christmas bomber" of 2010, who came to the U.S. as a 5-year-old with parents who were either refugees or asylees; he was turned in to the FBI by his father. And Ramiz and Sedina Hodzic, two of six Bosnian immigrants indicted in 2015 for allegedly sending money to ISIS, were also admitted as refugees when they were children. Yet as Bailey notes, Kurbanov, Mohamud, and the Hodzics were all radicalized after coming to America. "None of these people, be they refugees or anything else, were sleeper agents who intentionally remained inactive for a long period, established a secure position, and then struck. None, in other words, fit the scenario being bandied about to justify keeping the Syrians out."

4. It's been used to support anti-refugee sentiment ever since.

Following news of Alwan and Hammadi's arrests, the Obama-administration State Department slowed the processing of Iraqi refugee visa applications to a near-halt for several months. Since then, this "Bowling Green terror plot" has resurfaced several times when politically convenient. In 2015, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) used it as fodder for why we needed to block Obama from allowing in additional Syrian refugees. Now it's being used by the Trump administration to justify the president's recent executive order temporarily banning immigration from seven countries.

Photo Credit: Mohanad Shareef Hammadi and Waad Ramadan Alwan mugshots

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    'There are no comments'

    Indeed.

  • Slammer||

    'There is no commentariat'

  • Microaggressor||

    Refugee commenters welcome?

  • Ken Shultz||

    What do you call it when pointing out a red herring becomes a red herring?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    A fine kettle of fish?

  • Cute Little Bunny Rabbit||

    Herring impaired?

  • juris imprudent||

    Ocular configuration a la Swiss.

  • Diane Merriam||

    Gee, I live in Bowling Green and I never heard anything about this massacre. I heard about a couple of guys being picked up for working with terrorists, but somehow the local news must have just missed out on covering the massacre.

  • Karen24||

    It did cause Twitter to be worth reading for once. (My favorite was "These jokes about the Bowling Green Massacre are in poor taste now. We should wait until it actually happens.")

  • american socialist||

    Enb good as always

  • Idle Hands||

    The young men involved, Waad Ramadan Alwan and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, had come to the U.S. in 2009 as part of a program for displaced Iraqis. Once settled in Kentucky, the men were solicited by undercover FBI agents to help them send money and weapons to militants back in Iraq.

    has there actually been a case of islamic terrorism in this country where the FBI hasn't either been warned about potential terrorists, entrapped them like this case, or actually interviewed the people involved at one point?

  • commodious rebrands||

    Is there a single Klansman who isn't an undercover FBI agent?

  • Idle Hands||

    Good question. Of the top ten illicit drug distributors in this country what percentage do you think are paid FBI informants?

  • Hugh Akston||

    The only ones who aren't are undercover DEA agents.

  • Lord Rollingpin||

    That might seem ridiculous but recent news showed that the FBI were actually running a child porn site.
    So.....

  • Idle Hands||

    From all the reports it seems as if that FBI child porn site was THE child porn site.

  • Microaggressor||

    It's different when they do it.

  • Princess Trigger||

    Professional courtesy?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Agencest?

  • The Last American Hero||

    No. I read about this in The Man Who was Thursday, a Nightmare.

  • Thrawnuru||

    There was a great Get Smart episode where they infiltrate a Kaos cell only to find out at the end that every member of the cell was working for a different government agency. I wish I could find that clip.

  • Idle Hands||

    Also ENB really liked that debate you had up about sex trafficking you had up a couple of days ago. I thought you acquitted yourself as well as you could against those hysterical people, who I'm frightened of.

  • Cloudbuster||

    Somali terrorist at OSU, for one.

  • american socialist||

    Heavy on facts and details, no hysteria, and no worrying about trivial things (distracted focus)

  • mashed potatoes||

    isn't something like 70% of all terrorist arrests just the FBI getting the slowest kid in the mosque to say he wants to support jihad?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    No. It's probably closer to 80%.

    The bulk of the remainder is the FBI getting the slowest kid on some white nationalist forum to say he wants to blow something up.

  • Microaggressor||

    Slowest Kid in the Mosque
    Not sure what genre this album would be in.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    It's a new sitcom from Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

  • Wizard with a Woodchipper||

    -1 Schitt's Creek

  • juris imprudent||

    Try imagining it in different genres... without laughing.

    E.g. as a country album.

  • Fire Shikha||

    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/.....d=20931131

    Why is it that the original story about this when it first happened doesn't say this? I'm just wondering.

  • Fire Shikha||

    It says:

    "But the FBI discovered that Alwan had been arrested in Kirkuk, Iraq, in 2006 and confessed on video made of his interrogation then that he was an insurgent, according to the U.S. military and FBI, which obtained the tape a year into their Kentucky probe. In 2007, Alwan went through a border crossing to Syria and his fingerprints were entered into a biometric database maintained by U.S. military intelligence in Iraq, a Directorate of National Intelligence official said. Another U.S. official insisted that fingerprints of Iraqis were routinely collected and that Alwan's fingerprint file was not associated with the insurgency."

    I wouldn't doubt that the FBI may lie, but ABC's story seems to be completely different from yours

  • Fire Shikha||

    "The case drew attention at the highest levels of government, FBI officials told ABC News, when TEDAC forensic investigators tasked with finding IEDs from Bayji dating back to 2005 pulled 170 case boxes and, incredibly, found several of Alwan's fingerprints on a Senao-brand remote cordless base station. A U.S. military Significant Action report on Sept. 1, 2005 said the remote-controlled trigger had been attached to "three homemade-explosive artillery rounds concealed by gravel with protruding wires."

    "There were two fingerprints, developed on the top of the base station," Katie Suchma, an FBI supervisory physical scientist at TEDAC who helped locate the evidence, told ABC News at the center's IED examination lab. "The whole team was ecstatic because it was like finding a needle in a haystack."

    "This was the type of bomb he's talking about when he drew those pictures," added FBI electronics expert Stephen Mallow."

    It mentions that they caught him through a fake sting, but that there was a reason why he drew suspicion?

  • Crusty Juggler - #2||

    I wouldn't doubt that the FBI may lie,

    You should watch the HBO documentary The Newburgh Sting.

  • Fire Shikha||

    I know the FBI engages in entrapment all the time. Most of the terrorist plots that have been 'foiled' in the US were the result of entrapment. I don't think its conspiratorial to ask why a new report (that is over five years old) as suddenly changed within a month. Was there new evidence or is this just a new convenient narrative?

  • Crusty Juggler - #2||

    Was there new evidence or is this just a new convenient narrative?

    Conway used the term "Bowling Green Massacre," trying to create one narrative, which is then being combated by another narrative - there was no massacre - which then bogs down into a "what actually happened," the truth of which is difficult to ascertain because of the secrecy of the FBI. I think that's the way the FBI wants it.

  • Idle Hands||

    the truth of which is difficult to ascertain because of the secrecy of the FBI. I think that's the way the FBI wants it.

    I don't mean to be alarming but it's this kind of secrecy that makes me think that it has something to do with Area 51 and FEMA. Of course when they are transparent and clear that also makes me think it has something to do with Area 51 and FEMA. Really anything and everything the gov. does lead me to think it has something to do with Area 51 and FEMA. Aliens.

  • Fire Shikha||

    I just want to know what really happened with the Bowling Green thing. Who fucking cares if she said 'massacre' or not. I would like an actual discussion about what happened there.

    This is the god damn problem that has infected Reason, too- rather than cutting through the bullshit, everyone is just feeding the bullshit from their own perspective.

  • Crusty Juggler - #2||

    Who fucking cares if she said 'massacre' or not.

    I do, because she is an advisor to the president, speaking on his behalf, using an event that didn't happen to justify a policy.

    I would like an actual discussion about what happened there.

    Me too. However, getting jumbled into that mess helps both sides, because then everyone can bitch over details written from stories full of leaked information from the FBI, attorneys, etc. Are the court documents available? It seems like that is the only way to find the truth.

  • Crusty Juggler - #2||

    Additionally, the truth as to what happened quickly devolves into "Refugees bad! Refugees good!," which is what it seems like most people want to do anyway.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    she is an advisor(sic) to the president, speaking on his behalf

    Technically, this is not what advisers do, but carry on

  • Crusty Juggler - #2||

    Burn! Thanks for the correction, too. To be clear, this is what she said:

    At one point, Conway made a reference to two Iraqi refugees whom she described as the masterminds behind "the Bowling Green massacre."

    "Most people don't know that because it didn't get covered," Conway said.

    But sure, the media is to blame for that.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    To be clear, this is what she said

    Which part of your block quote is what she said? And who is the "she" to whom you are referring?
    Are you making a "what she said" joke?

  • juris imprudent||

    Are you making a "what she said" joke

    That's it - Title IX for you!!

  • CampingInYourPark||

    And what the fuck has that to do with whether she is speaking on the behalf of anyone else?

  • ||

    2015 version
    http://abcnews.go.com/Internat.....d=35252500

    "We need to take this as a case study and draw the right lessons from it, and not just high-five over this," said retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Barbero, who headed the military's Joint IED Defeat Organization until May 2012. "How did a person who we detained in Iraq -- linked to an IED attack, we had his fingerprints in our government system -- how did he walk into America in 2009?"

    Basically these guys had been tagged for years and walked into the US. This means the vetting system at of 2009 was totally inadequate. If the US cannot catch these guys getting in there are likely a lot of holes.
    Notice REASON omits this part of the story.

    The FBI entrapment is another issue.

  • Dan S.||

    Reason doesn't totally omit it. Back in Iraq, Alwan and Hammadi had been involved efforts to fight off invading U.S. soldiers during the early days of the Iraq war, according to what they told undercover officials. If they saw themselves then as opposing foreign invaders, then what? Is that why the FBI targeted them for the "sting"?

  • Crusty Juggler - #2||

    It's a conspiracy.

  • Jerryskids||

    Yet as Bailey notes, Kurbanov, Mohamud, and the Hodzics were all radicalized after coming to America. "None of these people, be they refugees or anything else, were sleeper agents who intentionally remained inactive for a long period, established a secure position, and then struck. None, in other words, fit the scenario being bandied about to justify keeping the Syrians out."

    Sounds to me like if the US is radicalizing moderate Muslims into becoming terrorists that's a good reason for keeping out at least the moderate Muslims. The extremists should be okay - if they're already radicals there's no chance of them getting radicalized by the US.

  • GILMORE™||

    the only terrorists in this case were manufactured by the FBI.

    According to this 2011 ABC story, the FBI were led to the Kentucky suspects by both sources associated with them who believed they were dangerous, as well as their fingerprints tied to bomb-making in Iraq

    e.g.

    An intelligence tip initially led the FBI to Waad Ramadan Alwan, 32, in 2009. The Iraqi had claimed to be a refugee who faced persecution back home -- a story that shattered when the FBI found his fingerprints on a cordless phone base that U.S. soldiers dug up in a gravel pile south of Bayji, Iraq on Sept. 1, 2005. The phone base had been wired to unexploded bombs buried in a nearby road. ... the FBI discovered that Alwan had been arrested in Kirkuk, Iraq, in 2006 and confessed on video made of his interrogation then that he was an insurgent, according to the U.S. military and FBI, which obtained the tape a year into their Kentucky probe. ...prosecutors later revealed at Hammadi's sentencing hearing that he and Alwan had been caught on an FBI surveillance tape talking about using a bomb to assassinate an Army captain they'd known in Bayji, who was now back home ...

    For something "Manufactured" by the FBI, it sounds like they seem to went to a lot of effort there with the 'circumstantial evidence'.

  • GILMORE™||

    Correction - *2013 ABC News story

  • Slammer||

    OT: Gilmore, one thing I've noticed in the Robby stories about Milo and others is he always points out they have icky beliefs, but Robby never points out the things they are 100% correct about

  • GILMORE™||

    Robby never points out the things they are 100% correct about

    Milo and Robby's actual 'subject matter' ("campus political correctness") overlaps significantly - as do many of their opinions about it.

    What with the glorious hair they both have, you'd be forgiven for sometimes confusing the two.

  • Michael Hihn||

    but Robby never points out the things they are 100% correct about

    100,000 words is too long for thus venue. It's not relevant. The "icky beliefs" support the "icky things" they do. Would you demand the same for Hitler? Obama? Hillary?
    I didn't think so.

  • mr simple||

    Correction - *2013 ABC News story

    Aha! Caught in a lie! Your racist points are invalidated, racist.

  • GILMORE™||

    But throughout their interactions with undercover FBI agents in 2010 and 2011, Alwan and Hammadi never discussed plans to attack anyone or cause destruction on U.S. soil.

    again = ""he and Alwan had been caught on an FBI surveillance tape talking about using a bomb to assassinate an Army captain they'd known in Bayji, who was now back home""

    this would seem like less of a contradiction if ENB provided some source

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Surveillance tape doesn't count as an "interaction with undercover FBI agents"?

  • Fire Shikha||

    "The Iraqi had claimed to be a refugee who faced persecution back home -- a story that shattered when the FBI found his fingerprints on a cordless phone base that U.S. soldiers dug up in a gravel pile south of Bayji, Iraq on Sept. 1, 2005. The phone base had been wired to unexploded bombs buried in a nearby road. ... the FBI discovered that Alwan had been arrested in Kirkuk, Iraq"

    Does the FBI fake the fingerprints, too? I'm just wondering why this story has suddenly changed literally in the past month

  • Pan Zagloba||

    No, she covered that part.
    Back in Iraq, Alwan and Hammadi had been involved efforts to fight off invading U.S. soldiers during the early days of the Iraq war, according to what they told undercover officials.

    But that is completely irrelevant to the discussion of what they did in US between 2010 and 2011.

  • Fire Shikha||

    But then they should not have been given refugee status in the first place, right? So how was it a manufacturing FBI terrorist attack. It seems like the story should have been that they should not have been in the country in the first place?

    Am I missing something here?

  • Pan Zagloba||

    No, just that you are trying to get outside the very narrow set of arguments presented above.

    Whether they should have been granted the status is irrelevant. The relevant argument is that between 2010 and 2011, FBI enticed them to break the law, and they did, rather than doing it on their own initiative.
    Any conclusion you want to draw from the article is your own. ENB simply reported four facts, which are more or less related, and (from what I can see, bar the surveillance tape Gil mentioned) are technically correct.
    Now, sources (other than the FBI press release) might be nice, but I'm going to assume she's checked it before posting, because ENB has credibility with me.

  • GILMORE™||

    Since we're already nitpicking

    Alwan and Hammadi had been involved efforts to fight off invading U.S. soldiers during the early days of the Iraq war, according to what they told undercover officials

    According to the ABC report, they made these statements when arrested in Kirkuk in 2006 = presumably to uniformed military personnel.

    Alwan had been arrested in Kirkuk, Iraq, in 2006 and confessed on video made of his interrogation then that he was an insurgent

    sloppy, or conscious distortions? these things add up.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Well, they could have also told it to the undercover officials at a later date, between 2010 and 2011. Something like

    "You hate the US? HA! We were involved in efforts to fight off invading US soldiers during the early days of the Iraq war, so there. Now where the white women at?"

  • GILMORE™||

    when you say, "according to", you're suggesting something is the primary source of information.

    Claiming it was something stated to 'undercover officials' suggests that they might have been bullshitting (because there are no obvious repercussions when you don't know who you're talking to)

    Pointing out that they 'confessed on video tape to military interrogators while under arrest in Iraq' has an entirely different degree of credibility.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Oh, I agree that's why it wasn't mentioned. I just find it somehow cool that almost every complaint can be countered with technically correct. I guess it appeals to my rules-lawyer side.
    It's at least an intellectual exercise to spot the holes, rather than, say, Gillespie word-flood that just makes me throw my hands in the air and say "Sure, Grandpa, whatever you say".

  • GILMORE™||

    . I just find it somehow cool that almost every complaint can be countered with technically correct.

    yes, which leads one to assume its actual dissembling, rather than just sloppiness.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    If Reason has to be a propaganda outlet, I prefer competent contributors like ENB to incompetents like Big Robby!

  • GILMORE™||

    If Reason has to be a propaganda outlet, I prefer competent contributors like ENB to incompetents like Big Robby!

    I don't prefer either. (as per my below)

    I care more about the integrity of an argument than whether i agree with the conclusions or not.

  • GILMORE™||

    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the claim will be justified on the basis that those discussions were captured *earlier* than the "interactions with undercover FBI agents in 2010 and 2011", therefore making the claim technically correct, if intentionally misleading. (*much like the 'rare company' point above, or Nick's "ZERO (fatal) attacks!!" assertions)

    its true, the FBI frequently manufactures 'fake terrorists' from shoddy circumstantial evidence, baiting testimony, go to great lengths to entrap people.

    its true that these types of baddies are very rare in the overall scope of the refugee program.

    neither of those things actually makes the evidence against these people less-real.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Or, ABC printed a bunch of bollocks. Let's not dismiss MSM incompetence too soon.

  • Fire Shikha||

    Let's not dismiss anyone's incompetence too soon, Reason or MSM.

  • GILMORE™||

    Thats certainly possible

    But as far as institutional-reputation goes ..... if ABC gets something factually incorrect - even if minor - they generally issue corrections or retract the report.

    The same doesn't apply so much to blogs like H&R

  • Ron||

    also note though that during the Bush years all reports of attempted terrorist captures in the U.S. were treated with derision and cases of entrapment but then during the Obama years the FBI was suddenly do its job of capturing the real terrorist amongst us.

  • GILMORE™||

    during the Bush years all reports of attempted terrorist captures in the U.S. were treated with derision and cases of entrapment but then during the Obama years the FBI was suddenly do its job of capturing the real terrorist amongst us.

    that's mostly because many of the news-touted 'suspected terrorist' cases WERE entirely entrapment bullshit. (many - not 'all', as you assert)

    Whereas in this case, they found these specific suspects by connecting their fingerprints to an actual bomb in Iraq.

    Sweeping generalizations are fun, but usually not true

  • Fire Shikha||

    This is frankly what is pissing me off about not just Reason, but pretty much most reporting now. Reports are changing to fit narratives. I just want to know what actually happened. Why did these findings suddenly change when the Trump administration made it a big deal?

    And if you note this you are a Trumpist. I DIDN'T EVEN VOTE FOR THE GUY, but I'm a rabid Trumpist, because I think it is weird that reporters are just changing their previous assertions in order to fit a new narrative that they want to push

  • Crusty Juggler - #2||

    It's a conspiracy.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    You should watch The Newburgh Sting

  • GILMORE™||

    I love Paul Newman in that

  • Idle Hands||

    Meh I kind of preferred the sequel.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Why did these findings suddenly change when the Trump administration made it a big deal?

    To show how full of shit he is?

  • GILMORE™||

    Lezziebitch No-Man Clown

  • Fire Shikha||

    Can you or anyone please address the discrepancy between the reporting about the incident when it originally occurred, versus what is being reported now? No one is disputing that the incidence of refugees committing acts of terrorism is non-existent (outside of Europe), but the original reports suggest that there was evidence that these men were in fact radicals, at least according to the original stories.

    Why did that finding suddenly change?

  • CampingInYourPark||

    These are alt-alternative facts

  • IWasADemocrat||

    It is very possible that Elizabeth Nolan Brown either
    1) did a poor investigation on this topic .. or
    2) formed a conclusion first, then worded the evidence to back that conclusion

    I think Elizabeth is a very smart and capable journalist, so I basically ruled (1) out.

  • Trshmnstr needs a new can||

    I think Elizabeth is a very smart and capable journalist

    She's one of the good ones here, but is sometimes susceptible to (2).

  • ||

    There has been some talk that she mixed up the Bowling Green plot with the actual massacre in Chattanooga-

    2015 Chattanooga shootings

    I don't know if that's true but if so would be an innocent mistake. Not that the press would give her the benefit of the doubt, but it is what it is.

  • paranoid android||

    I don't know if that's true but if so would be an innocent mistake. Not that the press would give her the benefit of the doubt, but it is what it is.

    Won't somebody think of the children lying government hacks?

  • Ken Shultz||

    Those of us who are old enough to remember the Reagan administration have seen this before.

    Because the press disagreed with Reagan, everything he did was insane, stupid, he was just an actor, etc.

    There were no honest mistakes. No one ever misspoke. When he made a joke about bombing Russia without knowing the mike was on, it was all taken seriously, etc.

    They're giving Trump and his people the same treatment they gave Reagan.

  • Princess Trigger||

    +1 Morning in America.
    -1 Evil Empire.

  • Ron||

    they treat all republicans with the same disdain no matter what their name or if they are even in office remember the outright lies about Mitt Romney.. they do like McCain but that guy is a WAR Hawk RINO capitulator to the left of the worst kind.

  • ||

    I started reading Reason around 2000, so I'm wondering now what their coverage during Reagan's presidency was like.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    If you were a subscriber, you'd have access to the archive and could find out...

    Wait, why am I advising giving them money? Oh well, it's still $15, right?

  • ||

    I've donated in the past regularly but never subscribed because I always read it online anyways and actually prefer to not deal with dead tree media. I'm sure as fuck not donating anymore until some serious house-cleaning goes on.

  • Raven Nation||

    June 1981, Murray Rothbard, "The Reagan Fraud":

    "There is no Reagan 'New Deal,' and nothing either historic or revolutionary is going on. The fact that a small handful of libertarians, or quasi-libertarians, have gotten middle-level jobs in the administration means nothing except that a different cast of characters is fattening at the public trough...The major point is that nothing really is going on. There are no budget cuts; there is no tax cut."

    "The Reagan administration is trying to reverse inflationary expectations and build public confidence in the dollar by trickery..."

  • Fatty Bolger||

    It's not exactly the same, but there are some definite parallels. We were told that Reagan was a B-movie actor, a buffoon who couldn't possibly be taken seriously, but that he was also an evil mastermind who would lead the world to destruction by starting world war three.

  • Ken Shultz||

    The underlying assumption seems to be that because there (supposedly) aren't any real life examples of the asylum seeker terrorists Trump is trying to prevent, that means the precautions Trump is taking are pointless.

    I'd counter that with two quick observations.

    1) ISIS has used asylum seekers to infiltrate Europe and has successfully perpetrated terrorist attacks in Europe. Whether they've successfully done so in the U.S. yet is immaterial. Don't they hate us just as much as the Europeans--maybe even more? If it hasn't happened here yet, that doesn't mean it isn't a legitimate concern.

    2) The asylum seekers Obama agreed to bring to the U.S. from Australia's refugee camps in Papua New Guinea (as I detailed here at Reason yesterday) have rioted, burning down their own camps. Rape perpetrated against women and children by these refugees was so endemic, they had to stop sending families with women and children to the camp.

    "Asylum seekers who were transferred to a processing center on the tiny Pacific island of Nauru after arriving in Australia as refugees may be moved again because of endemic sexual assault, rape and child abuse".

    http://time.com/4018253/abuse-.....-refugees/

    Terrorism isn't the only issue. For pity's sake, if it's too dangerous to let these refugees near women and children, then whether they should be resettled in our communities here in the U.S. isn't just a question about the risk of terrorism.

  • Fire Shikha||

    There's no point. You're just going to be mocked. Reason use to be good to read when they took an alternative perspective to issues. The report here should be about how the two men should not have been in the US to begin with, as even EBN admits that they were found to have participated in the insurgency in Iraq, and maybe how we should improve our refugee program rather than limiting the number of refugees or something. Now, Reason just regurgitates the exact same narrative that you'll find in any other outlet- no different perspective, no alternative thought, just bland narrative. This magazine sucks now.

  • RG||

    Was the OSU attacker a refugee?

  • ||

    " if it's too dangerous to let these refugees near women and children, then whether they should be resettled in our communities here in the U.S. isn't just a question about the risk of terrorism."

    ThursdayThoughts from an American currently in Iraq.

  • westernsloper||

    A previous resettlement plan that sought to move detainees from Nauru to Cambodia fell apart on Monday when Cambodian officials said they would no longer accept any refugees. The Southeast Asian nation had agreed to receive unlimited number of the asylum seekers in exchange for $28.5 million in development aid from Australia. Only four people were ever transferred.

    Obviously, Cambodia is full of Islamophobes. They should move the problematic Nauru refugees to the Southern Highlands of PNG. The Huli's will sort them out.

  • Wizard with a Woodchipper||

    dude, I think your caps lock button is broken.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Shrike unintentionally parodying himself is the most interesting thing he's done in years.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    4. It's been used to support anti-refugee sentiment ever since.

    There's a lot of hay that can be made on this statement.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Well, obviously, if it's been used to support anti-refugee sentiment, then it can't be true.

    Don't you know anything about logic? It goes around and around in circles like a tornado.

  • The Last American Hero||

    I saw on the news today there was a young man who was possibly confused about his sexuality attempting to engage in workplace violence at the Louvre.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Then he was murderously gunned down by an agent of the oppressive State. Brickbat incoming!

  • American Memer||

    Wasn't he trying to do CPR in the middle of a basketball game or something?

  • Ken Shultz||

    Yeah, but that was in France. We don't have to worry about that happening here--because this is America. Once the border is crossed all those negative feelings melt away like frost in the sun.

    Except for when they don't.

    Nine members of Minneapolis' Somali-American community have been convicted of trying to join ISIS, and dozens more from the same refugee community are known to have gone to Syria to fight along side ISIS.

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us.....rs-n685011

    Also, the guy that perpetrated the knife attack in the Minnesota mall that stabbed all those people, he was initially let into the country as a refugee.

  • PapayaSF||

    +1 Thanks for saving me the time to post this. Reason's argument amounts to: "Our Muslim refugees have only been making terror attacks in other countries, not here, you silly people! There's nothing to worry about!"

  • Tony||

    White Christian rightwingers have killed more people with bombs than Muslim refugees. Shall we kick them out?

  • Free Society||

    No we should send them to foreign lands force those countries to accept then en masse or label them as all manner of -ists.

  • Ron||

    so if I approach someone and ask them to commit a crime and they start to follow through are they not criminals.
    This is a true and accurate statement so then If these men acted in a manner to help terrorist then they have engaged in criminal acts

    that said it does appear that no one was attempting to do anything until the FBI teased some useful idiots to do their bidding. to me that should be illegal to set people up unless they have been actively searching for a method to commit a crime before hand. were they in this case?

    At this point i don't know if I could get an accurate account of that from any media, the FBI or even Reason which is a problem a lot of people are having these days. there is no one left to trust in this country which is the next step to anarchy

  • ||

    I see we as libertarians are supposed to start trusting the FBI now. So now that's CBP and the FBI. What's next, the CIA and the NSA?

  • CampingInYourPark||

    No, you're supposed to trust every immigrant from a third world shit-hole that says they are here to work hard and leave everybody else alone

  • GILMORE™||

    My problem with this, Nick's ridiculous "ZERO" piece, and others lately =

    You can make the same argument without resorting to intellectual dishonesty ....

    which i think is a fair characterization of any time you purposely spin facts/frame evidence selectively/omit relevant information, knowing that an unvarnished assessment of all the details sometimes makes your task more difficult.

    I think the better way is to lead with the worst information against your case ...(in this instance, for example, it would be that - 'unlike many FBI-ginned-up 'terror suspects', these were closer to the real McCoy than most')... the worst-information being your adversaries strongest-material.... and point out that even if these things are true there are better responses than, say, 'fucking with green-card holders'... or alternatively, that 'the sources of information - bomber fingerprints - has already become part of standard screening practices', and that people like this are already being screened out sans any 'new' Trumpian security claims.

    There's just better ways to make a libertarian argument that doesn't sacrifice your intellectual credibility in the process.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    #2 and #4 seem a little at odds. Whether you think they were set up by the FBI or not, these guys probably shouldn't have passed through the refugee vetting.

  • Fire Shikha||

    That's wrong think. Your liable to be assaulted by Leftists and then have that violence excused away by the writers of Reason
    "Woke Minds and Intersectional Solidarity"

  • robc||

    I assumed this was in BG, OH until earlier this morning.

    I live in BG, KY (since 2013) and had never heard of the incident until yesterday.

  • Carl_b||

    Me too, I thought the 2008 GMAC Bowl was the Bowling Green Massacre.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    They were just upset about the girls wearing dresses cut country tight.

  • Free Society||

    in Bowling Green, Kentucky, there was a terrorist plot uncovered, Conway noted Friday on Twitter, quickly shifting the spotlight back to the supposed danger posed by Islamic refugees.

    It's interesting that Islamic refugees only pose a "supposed danger", because the New Years Cologne mass sexual assaults and the repeated terrorists attacks in Europe never really happend, they only "supposedly" happened I guess.

  • Centralized Mind||

    But those weren't in America, so they don't count. We need to see how it goes here!

  • Centralized Mind||

    How does she know they weren't radical before coming here? You don't know the feelings they harbor.

  • Bacon-Magic et tu Reason?||

    ENB,
    Are their any statements by Kelly Anne Conway retracting her Bowling Green Massacre statement?

  • Free Society||

    OF COURSE NOT

  • L. Awn Dart||

    People behave as if there is only one answer, or one reason, for every policy. I find the Bowling Green story compelling evidence for one reason to slow, pause, or otherwise re-think some of our immigration policies. Pretending that "THIS ISN'T WHO WE ARE!!!" is just false. We have always had immigration rules, quotas, and sometimes actual bans (I use the word "ban" to signify something longer than a few months-- the Chinese Exclusion Act, for example). It's too bad Ms. Conway's use of the word "massacre" gave everyone such a great way to laugh at this issue, and gloss over the points of contact. But, again, it's only one reason. It's a direct rebuttal to the assertion (made by many) that refugees pose ZERO problems. That's all.

    What frosts my ass is not that the Obama administration exercised it's authority to make these judgements too, but that no one rushed into the streets in hysteria, Chuck Schumer didn't cry, and CNN et. al. did not lead an insurrection against Obama's Presidency. The double standard is just off the charts. If Team Trump was smart, they'd start publishing the number of Muslims coming in each day from the other... 189-ish? countries on Planet Earth. "Muslim Ban!", my ass.

  • XM||

    Is there a point to making a distinction between WHEN the radicalization takes place? The FBI isn't likely to approach a random 45 year old Cuban refugee and ask him to load supplies for Castro's army - much less the Iraqi resistance or ISIS. There would be no point to doing that.

    Why is it so difficult for some people to accept radical Islam as a unique and pervasive threat? If a Muslim federal worker shot up 50 people tomorrow, it's close to pointless to observe that he wasn't a refugee. Because he likely drew from the SAME source that radicalizes certain segment of the Muslim society regardless of the location. Muslim refugees, Asylum seekers and visa holders have committed acts of terrorism around the globe - here, in Europe, in their own countries, etc.

    You cannot say this about Cubans, North Koreans, Tibetians, etc. There are still some violent separatists and crooked cults all over the world, but they do not have the (as Bill Maher put it) the connecting tissue that would inspire random people to take on their cause.

  • Domina Elle||

    Obviously there is a lot of propaganda connected to refugees. There's also the exploitation of very real incidents by haters and bigots to forward hateful agendas. However, it's not so simple as 'refugees are all bad' OR for that matter 'refugees are all benevolent people just wanting to escape war'. This topic is very complex and deserves more than off the cuff reactions, narratives around bigotry OR human rights. Germany, France, England, Sweden and other regions are dealing with some heavy shit imported with asylum seekers and the USA has had a few cases. You've got to look much deeper at this to even attempt to understand it. We ARE talking cultures who believe gay people should be criminalized or even killed, sex with children is just fine and normalized for some, if a woman isn't covered she is seen as a whore who can be used at will. I'm not broad stroking but i am saying yes there are a good amount among them who fit the shoe. To pretend otherwise is foolish and in my construct makes deniers complicit. Calling people racist and bigoted for wanting to address this is contemptible. The prisons throughout Europe are full of asylum seekers who become radicalized if they weren't already. Public swimming pools have had numerous incidents of girls being molested and groped do people not realize that gender segregation is normal in various regions? I think it boils down to culture clashing and willing ignorance.

  • Domina Elle||

    The FBI has fabricated and created situations however the gang rapes, the rapes and murders, children being raped, crimes of various sorts, gangs taking over neighborhoods where even the police won't patrol anymore, mosques being shut down after being found to contain caches of weapons (France), these are realities in Germany, France, Sweden, England etc. guess what people? Not everyone wants rainbows and love and goodwill towards all other humans. Just because haters exploit what's happening doesn't mean we should pretend it's not happening or deny that it is happening. I'm betting the senior official whose 19 year old daughter was raped and murdered by a refugee (she had been volunteering at refugee centers) is rethinking his position. Rapes are rampant at refugee camps and people were trying to cover that up too.

    It's a shit show.

  • Locris||

    "Once settled in Kentucky, the men were solicited by undercover FBI agents to help them send money and weapons to militants back in Iraq."

    But try as they might, no matter how many times they refused, the FBI forced them to do it.

    Maybe I should become a drug dealer and have Reason write an article about the feds made me do it.

  • Africanis||

    Yes, the FBI made them do it like the Russians made Hillary put that server in the bathroom of that store. Then the FBI launched an investigation, two links to the FBI, coincidence??? I think not!

  • williamd||

    While I have very mixed emotions about Sting operations in general, I do not have any reservations about using them to "Test" the allegiance of foreign nationals let into our country as refugees or asylum seekers. The federal government's first duty is to protect the citizens.
    Whether or not the two Bolling Green Iraqis were plotting against Americans, they apparently were willing to help Jihadis in Iraq.
    This is the reason that I call myself a small l libertarian. The Libertarian position on open borders is every bit as utopian as anything the progressives ever dreamed up.
    I think we should suspend all immigration indefinitely and then adopt an immigration policy akin to New Zealand's where unless you can show that we need your talent in our country, you don't get in.
    This would have the benefit of inspiring people of other countries to rise up and demand their own Liberty, if that is indeed what they want.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    New administration burned for parroting previous administration brags.

  • BambiB||

    Terrorism is only effective if people are afraid.

    I'd be more concerned that refugees would turn America into France II.

  • Corporate Espionage||

    Just to head this off...
    Entrapment = Government Agent: "Do this illegal stuff or I will kill your family."
    Not entrapment = Government Agent: "Hey, let's do this illegal stuff!" Civilian: "Okay!" [Civilian does illegal stuff.]

  • download games||

    Right? As soon as this happened I just thought about people who were in the middle of Steps or multi-round satellites...either leave the country and gain internet access, or somehow exchange your seat to someone who can use it for a nominal fee.

    Download Salah Eldin Game
    download gta game

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online