state of confusion
On the surface it does seem ridiculous. Cutting terror funding to New York City and Washington DC, while increasing funding to Jacksonville, Louisville and Omaha.For once I agree with Chuck Schumer. "This is wrong and unfair, but also outrageous," Schumer said.
Could Mike Chertoff be this idiotic?
Devil's Advocate: Maybe the Feds have received credible information that indicate bigger summer threats to smaller American cities?
Still, and this is MIND BOGGLING, NYC was depending on this money for the following...From WaPo:
-- "Finance an $81.5 million proposal to safeguard Lower Manhattan and parts of midtown with a surveillance "ring of steel" modeled after security measures in London's financial district.
-- Pay half of the $200 million annual cost of heavily armored patrols - called Operation Atlas - and other current security measures, including protection for the nation's largest mass transit system.
-- Provide $38 million for counterterrorism training and equipment, such as biological and radioactive detection devices."
posted by Kent at 10:21 PM
3 Comments:
I think we need more funding for more of American, including New York and DC. We should get it from some of the aid we give these other countries, maybe even the same countries that support the terrorists that fly planes into our buildings.
Are you talking about other countries giving counter terrorism money to America? That'll never happen.
I think I'll file that under 'Wishful Thinking.'
Thanks for stopping by 'Lotion.'
I believe that AGTL here is proposing that we cut the aid that we send some of these other, perhaps terror-sponsoring, countries by the amount that we need to protect ourselves. In other words, rather than give our money away to any terror sponsoring regimes like Hamas, keep the money and use it domestically.
It’s an excellent idea.
On the main post though, I have a better devil’s advocate argument as to why New York did not, in its own view, receive adequate federal anti-terror funding.
There are certain bureaucratic reasons as to why funding is being increased in some cites and decreased in others. For example, for years now apparently New York City and DC have received the lion’s share of any federal ant-terror aid (for good reasons) whereas some of these other cites have yet to receive a dime. New York City has been receiving al lot more money for a lot more time.
Also, apparently New York City is using federal money to pay its own cops and firemen in some regard. It stands to reason that eventually the state of New York should bear some of the responsibility of paying their own cops and firemen like every other state has to.
Federal anti-terror funding going to New York City is being decreased from a massive amount to a slightly less massive amount while other cities are receiving an increase in funding from zero to what is still a more modest amount compared to what New York City receives, I imagine.
The current executive leadership of this country has been able to, by conducting a proactive war on terror, prevent any further attacks on American soil since 9-11. Perhaps it is time to spread the wealth, as it were, in regards to what federal money goes where in helping to prevent the insidious wrath of terrorism.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home