11-03-2016, 08:24 PM
(11-03-2016, 05:27 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Because of the type of access involved, because of the length of time involved, because of the difference reasons for investigation, the list could go on. to look at a situations like that of Abedin and compare it to the Orlando shooter or the San Bernadino shooters is extremely fallacious because of all of those things. It's not even apples and oranges, it's apples and asparagus.
I'm not saying I don't believe the DHS wouldn't have investigated Abedin properly because of what happened with the shooters, I'm saying I question whether they would properly act against Abedin given what they had found because they failed to act properly in past scenarios involving lower ranking citizens. The level of scrutiny is not what it's in question here. It's how the DHS would respond given their findings.
Omar Mateen, who again was working for the DHS, was given clearance to work for a firm that was handling sensitive US information? How? This guy was on the terror watch list for 2 years, a huge red flag that would involve heavy scrutiny, yet somehow he was allowed to work for the US government and was cleared to do so. You don't think that's a reason to lose faith in the DHS's handling of Abedin?
