Keep coming back to this: When Nidal Hasan killed 13 at Ft. Hood, it was failure of President/NatSec. When kid kills 20 little kids? No.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel I don't remember it that way. I remember people mainly questioning military psych screening.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MikeDrewWhat
@MikeDrewWhat Well, then why did NCTC just get access to all our data partially as a result?5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel ...Whatever arguments those are, they don't make this a failure of the national security bureaucracy.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MikeDrewWhat
@MikeDrewWhat If NatSec definition excludes the biggest threats to the security of this country, that's a problem.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel "National security" has always meant certain things & not others - i.e. outside threats. Do you like it when "NatSec" rhetoric>>1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MikeDrewWhat
@MikeDrewWhat 1) Not since 9/11 when we've been wiretapping domestically in name of NatSec, 2) that's a problem then.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel If fighting domestic crime/terrorism has been given more tools since 9/11, still doesn't make it Nat Sec. Civ libs fought that.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@MikeDrewWhat Most of that treatment as NatSec is expensive and counterproductive. Yet it does nothing to prevent much more real threat.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.