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

JJChambers

(1,115 posts)

7. Did you read the title of the OP?

Reply to seaglass (Reply #5)

Tue Apr 15, 2014, 10:34 AM

Apr 2014

It says the surveillance state doesn't work. Clearly it does, as these two were apprehended as a direct result of heavy surveillance, before they could bomb again.

There is no doubt that the FBI dropped the ball during their initial investigation into these terrorists in 2011. But that failure has nothing to do with the surveillance state.

The title of this OP should be changed to 'The FBI is incompetent but the surveillance state is effective'

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

16 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Boston Marathon Bombing Shows Why Surveillance State Doesn't Work [View all] Jefferson23 Apr 2014 OP

We have a highway shooter in Kansas City they can't catch.... cbdo2007 Apr 2014 #1

In the case of the Kansas shooter, there needs to be a close examination of why this Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #2

The boston bombers were caught because of the surveillance ... JJChambers Apr 2014 #3

Then you missed the point of the OP. n/t Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #4

Was that sarcasm? I think the point is catching them before the act. n/t seaglass Apr 2014 #5

Did you read the title of the OP? JJChambers Apr 2014 #7

I read the article. The title was the title of the article, you should take that up with the editor seaglass Apr 2014 #11

You need to adjust your expectations .. JJChambers Apr 2014 #13

Nah, I'm anti-surveillance state. Did you read the article? n/t seaglass Apr 2014 #15

Why? JJChambers Apr 2014 #16

The "alleged." Fawke Em Apr 2014 #6

Lol no JJChambers Apr 2014 #9

You've not seen the video because it's never been released. Fawke Em Apr 2014 #10

The shootout was imaginary, too? JJChambers Apr 2014 #14

Maybe someone should have heeded Russian warnings about his potential Islamic terrorism seveneyes Apr 2014 #8

I thin it demonstrated how surveillance cameras work to at least capture the terrorists. MohRokTah Apr 2014 #12