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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumBig Bro Broken: Lavish surveillance shattered by Boston bombings
&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Published on May 2, 2013
Many US government officials are calling for tougher national security measures, in the wake of the deadly Boston bombings. But more than a decade of multi-billion-dollar surveillance, at the expense of civil liberties, has failed to prevent terror at home. Experts say Washington's security strategy has already cost far more than it's worth.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1272 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Big Bro Broken: Lavish surveillance shattered by Boston bombings (Original Post)
marmar
May 2013
OP
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)1. I'm willing to bet that many pockets have been lined with the $700Bn
spent on making us safer.
2naSalit
(86,586 posts)2. But perhaps
only a specific select few.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)3. Probably members of the 1%. imho
2naSalit
(86,586 posts)4. Indeed...
That's what i was thinking and what i suspected you meant, perhaps.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)5. I should have just said it outright to begin with, huh? Ha. nt