I'm no expert, but I'd call that coercion, where the victim knows they are being forced to do something they don't want to do. Entrapment is about tricking the victim into doing something that they wouldn't have done on their own.

The FBI is doing the same thing that terrorist leaders do: pushing misguided and easily influenced people into performing terrorist acts. The FBI is not likely to catch any of the leaders this way, just the grunts.

Entrapment is when a LEO induces a person to commit a crime that they were previously not disposed to commit. Therefore, if the person has shown no inclination to commit a crime, then it seems that coercion could be a subtype of entrapment.

However, when criminal informants are used rather than LEO's to perform the coercion, that wouldn't be entrapment .

> However, when criminal informants are used rather than LEO's to perform the coercion, that wouldn't be entrapment .

An LEO using a "criminal informant" as an intermediary agent to coerce a target into committing a crime is still an LEO inducing the person to commit the crime.

Grunts make good headlines. The FBI/CIA/NSA already failed at 9/11, so they've learned to use citizens to prop up their image.