posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 01:03 PM
reply to post by grimghost
A lot of domestic security is based on protecting the infrastructure and enhancing our capability to respond to and recover from disasters. It's not
about catching every little guy who rigs up a bomb in his basement before he detonates it. You can't do that, not without a police state. Nor is it
about maintaining 24/7 surveillance on every single person who has ever come up on the FBI's radar. Again, police state. It's about accepting the fact
that certain things will happen, then taking steps to mitigate those things and recover from them. The reaction and recovery in Boston, by most
accounts, were excellent. In the olden days of domestic terrorism, guys like Eric Rudolph could carry on extended campaigns. The Tsarnaev brothers
were caught within days. Maybe they were just chumps, but maybe we're getting a little better at this kind of thing.
RT is a Russian source, and Russians historically have a very different idea of what constitutes proper domestic security.
edit on 27-4-2013 by
FurvusRexCaeli because: (no reason given)