The story is as it is. You are making a lot of assumptions not based in fact. The government owes us an explanation, and they can do so without jeopardizing national security. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuyThen ask. They might be able to tell you. I am not sure based on the article how much research the author actually did. I am just pointing out that there are not enough facts for us to jump to conclusions. I did not see anything stating the military refused to respond or that the politicians stated that they were not going to continue surveillance. This is typical lazy reporting that has caused so much ignorance in the nation.
Why is he turning the radar inward, instead of outward, oh dumbest-of-all posters, Eva? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuyDon't worry i'va, wear StupidOldLyingFart's "dumbest-of-all-posters" like it was a badge of honor. I suspect that you are at least the tenth poster that he has previously made that claim.
Then let the government come out and explain themselves. It's their duty to keep us informed. However, they keep too many secrets, and do a lot of things without explanation. There can be only one answer why they operate this way. They don't want us to know. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuyYou are a one-man inquisition.
As for satellite surveillance I am not sure that it is as good as land based systems for everything. Originally Posted by LazThey are and they aren't. Satellite systems see things one way, land-based systems see them differently. Ideally, you want both, AND you want airborne fast movers (like the late, lamented Blackbird) to fill in the gaps.