General Discussion

redgreenandblue

(2,088 posts) Mon Jul 23, 2012, 11:24 AM Jul 2012

One has to wonder why all that anti-terror surveillance

is unable to detect a person who is acquiring explosives and war-gear in large quantities. Legally owned or not. I thought that was essentially the point.

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

One has to wonder why all that anti-terror surveillance (Original Post) redgreenandblue Jul 2012 OP

too busy tracking down potheads... n/t nebenaube Jul 2012 #1

there for a while it seemed like redgreenandblue Jul 2012 #2

Doesn't fit the profile? aquart Jul 2012 #3

I really wonder why there wasn't a red flag going off somewhere. Initech Jul 2012 #4

Honestly I was wondering the same thing Reasonable_Argument Jul 2012 #5

nebenaube

(3,496 posts)

1. too busy tracking down potheads... n/t

Reply to redgreenandblue (Original post)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 11:42 AM

Jul 2012

redgreenandblue

(2,088 posts)

2. there for a while it seemed like

Reply to nebenaube (Reply #1)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 02:30 PM

Jul 2012

one couldn't type "bush stinks" on a message board without getting a visit from the secret service, but spending 20k on war gear apparently doesn't set of any alarm bells.

aquart

(69,014 posts)

3. Doesn't fit the profile?

Reply to redgreenandblue (Original post)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 02:32 PM

Jul 2012

I think you have a VERY good point. Watch the white guys, dammit!

Initech

(100,068 posts)

4. I really wonder why there wasn't a red flag going off somewhere.

Reply to redgreenandblue (Original post)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 02:44 PM

Jul 2012

Reasonable_Argument

(881 posts)

5. Honestly I was wondering the same thing

Reply to redgreenandblue (Original post)

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 02:47 PM

Jul 2012

If they're tracking all our purchases looking for patterns then surely someone buying weapons, ammo, and body armor first the first time ever over a couple of months would set off a red flag.

Reply to this discussion