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
 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
3. It's never been the lack of data, but the inability to deal with all the data they have.
Sat Nov 2, 2013, 09:08 PM
Nov 2013

They had enough data to prevent 9/11 but couldnt process it properly. After 9/11 they screamed for allowances to get more data. This was a ruse. Preventing another 9/11 isnt as important to them as getting enough data that they can control everything and everyone.

In politics problems are solved, not to get the best solution, but to get the solution that advances an agenda.

After the invasion of Iraq based on extremely bad intelligence data, was anyone fired? Nope, and George Tenet got a medal of Freedom award for gathering and packaging bad intelligence data.

After 9/11, did anyone get fired for failing to halt this disaster? Nope. So why didnt they know about this attack? One reason is that there was too little data. Which is bullshit. The had all the data they needed. But preventing the attack on the WTC wasnt their top priority. The excuse of not having enough data was used to pass laws allowing the intelligence agencies more power to get more data.

Recommendations

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

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Progressive Media Resources Group»PBS NewsHour: "Mass ...»Reply #3