Hardly surprising when most resources are spent on mass surveillance, reliant on weak security. Snowden's leaks show the focus is to "prevent public debate abo

Hardly surprising when most resources are spent on mass surveillance, reliant on weak security. Snowden's leaks show the focus is to "prevent public debate about the mass surveillance program." - GCHQ, leaked slide. > "The mass surveillance program has done nothing to prevent terrorist attacks, it has not stopped a single one.", concludes Obama's 2014 report chaired by the ex-deputy director of the CIA. Compromising public safety by starving resources from real investigative intelligence. > "If you collect it all, you understand nothing." Snowden They were warned of the Belgian Bombers by Turkish Intelligence. Warned he had just returned from training camps. Warned a Tsarnev brother had been at a training camp just before he bombed Boston. Real warnings about activated radical, single dangerous individuals - not a needle in haystack - direct advance warnings. Same with London 7/7 and in all cases the response is "we didn't have sufficient resources to target these individuals." If these attacks were preventable - why weren't they ? This question must be asked again and again and we should be unsatisfied with 'closing the stable door' answers like 'because they had burner phones'. Because that is not their focus is the awful, sad, inescapable truth. All sources from this debate between Greenwald, Chomsky & Snowden: https://theintercept.com/2016/03/30/edward-snowden-noam-chomsky-glenn-greenwald-a-conversation-on-privacy/ https://theintercept.com/2016/03/30/edward-snowden-noam-chom...