Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Julian Assange: Wikileaks is 'Drowning in Material' [View all]jeff47
(26,549 posts)33. It was the implication of what you wrote. That the government would be pulling the trigger.
Why does the FBI deal with such people?
Because part of their job is to investigate crimes. Especially ones that take place across state lines. The memos appear to reference people doing things in at least New York and Texas. That would bring in FBI jurisdiction.
Who are the FBI talking with?
From the context, it would appear to be informants or other entities reporting a potential crime.
What is in the redacted parts?
From the context, it appears to be the names of the informants and the targets of the investigation.
I think I have that right, seeing how I'm a taxpayer, right?
Well, let's pretend this is actually the FBI investigating a right-wing hate group that was planning to assassinate OWS leaders. What do you think such a group would do to informants that called the FBI on this plan? Is your right to know who those people are greater than what will happen to them, and the effect it would have on other potential informants?
Now, let's pretend this is actually an FBI assassination plot. Why are the redacted boxes so large for groups that would be identified by abbreviations? Why do they use phrases that do not imply certainty? For example, "____ reported...". If you're doing the shooting, it isn't "reported". You wouldn't use that qualifier.
And a SECRET clearance is pretty easy to get, and there are a lot of them. Why would an assassination plot be something accessible by around a hundred thousand people? That's begging for someone to leak it, and the government is not that stupid.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
65 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Exactly. It's only the Alex Jones / Wayne Madsen tin-foil loons of the world...
SidDithers
Jul 2015
#9
Nice smear, especially considering how FBI was targeting Occupy Wall Street for assassination.
Octafish
Jul 2015
#11
Truth hurts the tiny group here that TEE HEE giggles about the BFEE and their warmongering ways.
Rex
Jul 2015
#56
Thanks, Rex! For some reason, what's on DU isn't on ABCNNBCBSFakeNoiseNutworks.
Octafish
Jul 2015
#59
Notice that too did you? Also do you notice how they seem to know so much about the Foxnews noise
Rex
Jul 2015
#60
It was the implication of what you wrote. That the government would be pulling the trigger.
jeff47
Jul 2015
#33
11. Nice smear, especially considering how FBI was targeting Occupy Wall Street for assassination."
NuclearDem
Jul 2015
#42
Where exactly do you get this interpretation that the FBI was planning to kill OWS leaders?
NuclearDem
Jul 2015
#35
Of course, that must be in the redacted portion, as it's not in what readers can see.
Octafish
Jul 2015
#49