FBI kills a man- tying up a loose end?

[ideologue08]

[festive1]

If the FBI informant enticed the Boston Marathon bombers to bomb the Marathon, why wasn't it thwarted instead of carried out? Or is the fact that it was carried out your "proof" this man killed in Floridia was the informant that was actually a double agent?
I'll grab my tin-foil hat while I await your reply.

[ideologue08]

If the FBI informant enticed the Boston Marathon bombers to bomb the Marathon, why wasn't it thwarted instead of carried out? Or is the fact that it was carried out your "proof" this man killed in Floridia was the informant that was actually a double agent?
I'll grab my tin-foil hat while I await your reply.

I have no proof whatsoever. All I'm doing is enquiring and asking a question. Isn't that what journalists do every day? The sooner we know details about the man that was killed the better, because I'm very very skeptical at the moment.

[Tonus]

All I'm doing is enquiring and asking a question. Isn't that what journalists do every day?

Among other things. *twirls moustache*

The BBC report is too vague, until more details emerge there's simply too little information. From that story, it would appear that they visited a man in his home to question him regarding the bombing of the Boston Marathon, and now the man is dead, killed by one of the agents. That's a really big gap to fill without more details.

[ideologue08]

All I'm doing is enquiring and asking a question. Isn't that what journalists do every day?

Among other things. *twirls moustache*

The BBC report is too vague, until more details emerge there's simply too little information. From that story, it would appear that they visited a man in his home to question him regarding the bombing of the Boston Marathon, and now the man is dead, killed by one of the agents. That's a really big gap to fill without more details.

Well, the first question any journalist should (probably would) ask an FBI spokesperson is, "what that man an informant?". One of the jobs of journalists is to satisfy people's curiosities and ask questions related to speculative theories.

I'm just being curious. I understand there's nothing concrete as of yet.

---

Even if he wasn't an informant, the idea that the FBI can just go into your home and shoot you dead is a fucking disgrace and it's disturbing. No charge, no jury nothing. I wonder if there's anyone who can corroborate this story other than the FBI themselves?

[festive1]

No. Journalism is about reporting facts, not starting with a premise and trying to support it. One must follow the facts and see where they lead. When one has enough dots to connect, then assumptions can be made, but not before.

---

If the FBI came knocking on my door, I'd probably call a lawyer. Becoming violent when law enforcement comes knocking is never a good idea.

[ideologue08]

No. What the fuck do you think journalists do at press conferences except ask questions you ignorant woman? Asking questions is a part and parcel of journalism.

No, becoming violent is not a good idea, but the only evidence you have that someone became violent just so happens to be the FBI, the very people who shot and killed him. There must be a thorough inquiry.

[Minimalist]

I have no proof whatsoever.

At least you are consistent.

[ideologue08]

I have no proof whatsoever.

At least you are consistent.

What a rep/kudos whore you are.

[festive1]

Journalists at press conferences ask questions to gain more information. Do they ask specific questions because they have ideas of where the story is going? Of course. But a good journalist sticks to the facts and leaves out their own unfounded conjectures, until they have the evidence to support them. At that point they aren't unfounded conjectures, are they?
I'm sure there will be an inquiry. This happened when? Yesterday or this morning? Give it time before jumping to the conclusion that the FBI hatched some elaborate scheme to enable and entrap the Boston Marathon bombers. Jeeze.