Decius wrote:
] jessica wrote:
] ] Are we now -funding- potential terrorists?!?!
]
] Interesting question.
]
] There are two ways to get people to do what you want. Positive
] reenforcement, and negative reenforcement. The US likes to use
] positive reenforcement because the alternatives can be,
] frankly, brutal, and most of them are alternately illegal or
] at least frowned upon by the human rights community. (Of
] course, the US has recently threatened to export terrorist
] suspects to France. I have no idea what the French do to
] international terrorism suspects but apparently the threat is
] enough to get people talking...)
]
] If they don't make good on these deals, their programs won't
] work. This program did work. This guy being rich in London is
] worth catching the leadership of Al'Q. I hope they don't set
] this guy up and just forget about him. Thats kind of what they
] did with Bin Lauden in the first place isn't it?

My concern is that Al'Q might be sacrificing some of their leaders as a way to get money. This Egyptian was an Al'Q foot soldier.. Maybe Mohammed's job was done, they sacrificed him to us, so that one of their other guys could get a substantial amount of money, which in all likelihood will go right back into the "terror network". Someone new that we don't know about yet will take over for Mohammed, and the organization will be $27 million richer. That's what really worries me. I'm all for positive reinforcement, but maybe the US should be using a different method.. the only people who know where the key leaders of terrorist groups are would be other members of the terrorist groups, or those with ties to the leaders. Are these the people we want to be handing over millions of dollars to?

RE: Sources: Egyptian gets $27 million for Mohammed's arrest tip