Homeland Security slashes anti-terror funds for NY by 40%

[Chadman]

Gee, maybe Brownie WAS doing a heckuva job, compared to whoever came up with this ASSessment. Why would we feel the need to protect New York City from a terror attack?

:banghead:

No Icons, No Monuments Worth Protecting

June 01, 2006 12:18 PM
Richard Esposito Reports:

New York has no national monuments or icons, according to the Department of Homeland Security form obtained by ABC News. That was a key factor used to determine that New York City should have its anti-terror funds slashed by 40 percent--from $207.5 million in 2005 to $124.4 million in 2006.

The formula did not consider as landmarks or icons: The Empire State Building, The United Nations, The Statue of Liberty and others found on several terror target hit lists. It also left off notable landmarks, such as the New York Public Library, Times Square, City Hall and at least three of the nation's most renowned museums: The Guggenheim, The Metropolitan and The Museum of Natural History.

The form ignored that New York City is the capital of the world financial markets and merely stated the city had four significant bank assets.

New York City is home to Chase, JP Morgan, Citi Group, The New York Stock Exchange, The Commodities Exchange, American Express, George Soros funds, Michael Gabelli's funds, Lazard Frere and Salomon Brothers, to name just a few of the more prominent banking interests located there.

The formula did note a commuter population of more than 16 million around the city twice struck by fundamentalist terrorists and twice more targeted in plots halted in pre-operational stages. It noted the more than eight million residents and the largest rail ridership in the nation - more than five million. It is those commuters and rail riders who are expected to suffer most from the cuts since mass transit is listed on most DHS alerts as the top terror target. (Click here for the Strategic Threat Document obtained by ABC News.)

The report lists as classified "visitors of interest destination city," immigration cases, suspicious incidents and FBI cases. New York City is home to the largest FBI field office in the country, which actively monitors 24/7 the Iranian Mission.* The city has also had the most significant terror trials in the nation and is home to one of the largest air hubs in the nation.

June 1, 2006

 

[kosar]

And Omaha, NE got their anti-terror funding increased by 82%.

Makes sense.

 

[Chadman]

I'll bet Tom Osborne had something to do with that...gotta protect the Huskers, baby.

 

[AR182]

And Omaha, NE got their anti-terror funding increased by 82%.

Makes sense.

i think there have been threats on the mutual of omaha building..but they couldn't tell if it was from terrorists or from angry policyholders who have been denied their benefits..

 

[gardenweasel]

tom osbourne is considered a national treasure?....

worried about the corn supply(the new oil?)...


honestly,i`m with my democratic brothers on this one....

on it`s face,it seems amazingly stupid...

 

[kosar]

i think there have been threats on the mutual of omaha building..but they couldn't tell if it was from terrorists or from angry policyholders who have been denied their benefits..

:mj07:

Good thing it wasn't Eddie that posted that or Wayne would be all over it.

 

[kneifl]

And Omaha, NE got their anti-terror funding increased by 82%.

Makes sense.

It's probably because SAC Airforce base is located closley located outside of Omaha, NE in an outerlying suburb in Bellevue, NE. I only know this because I use to live in Omaha, NE. SAC Airforce base is one of the largest US Air bases, I think on the day of 911 Bush was debriefed on the 911 situation there.

kneifl

 

[kosar]

It's probably because SAC Airforce base is located closley located outside of Omaha, NE in an outerlying suburb in Bellevue, NE. I only know this because I use to live in Omaha, NE. SAC Airforce base is one of the largest US Air bases, I think on the day of 911 Bush was debriefed on the 911 situation there.

kneifl

Not familiar with that airbase, but did they just relocate there in the last year?

And frankly, one of our airbases is about # 10,000 on our list of likely targets.

 

[kneifl]

Nope, one of the largest US Airbases in the country - been around for a while. I agree, their are much more likely targets (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc.), just thought it might be a factor for that huge jump. Sort of surprises me that it didn't come sooner though, like in 2002.

kneifl

 

[smurphy]

Not familiar with that airbase, but did they just relocate there in the last year?

And frankly, one of our airbases is about # 10,000 on our list of likely targets.

Exactly. I think it's pretty general knowledge that terrorists prefer soft targets and large populations.

Nebraska. ...Well, then again Oklahoma City was hit pretty hard a few years back. Islamists aren't the only terrorists to worry about I suppose.

 

[djv]

So more of us find out what a joke that dept is. Was there any doubt after Katrina. I know that's FEMA but ran by same Security Club.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

its never ending---

Chad

"New York City should have its anti-terror funds slashed by 40 percent--from $207.5 million in 2005 to $124.4 million in 2006."

Thats 325 mill in 2 years---Since your doing the reporting would you share with us how this ranks vs other cities--and the 124 mill this year--how does it rank with other cities and how close is its nearst competitor in funds received?

Matt
"NE got their anti-terror funding increased by 82%"

This might be newsworthy if we knew what their budget was previously? Of course all we see in media is the 82%.

When they report one side using money and the other side a % a prudent person needs to think why?

When I get time today (or anyone else)lets see if we can locate the budgets of all states in 05 and 06--and we'll get the facts and see if we are trying to get sucked in again by the ole media skewed half truths.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

its never ending---

Chad

"New York City should have its anti-terror funds slashed by 40 percent--from $207.5 million in 2005 to $124.4 million in 2006."

Thats 325 mill in 2 years---Since your doing the reporting would you share with us how this ranks vs other cities--and the 124 mill this year--how does it rank with other cities and how close is its nearst competitor in funds received?

Matt
"NE got their anti-terror funding increased by 82%"

This might be newsworthy if we knew what their budget was previously? Of course all we see in media is the 82%.

When they report one side using money and the other side a % a prudent person needs to think why?

When I get time today (or anyone else)lets see if we can locate the budgets of all states in 05 and 06--and we'll get the facts and see if we are trying to get sucked in again by the ole media skewed half truths.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
May 31, 2006

Breakdown: Homeland Security Grants
By The Associated Press
ASSOCIATED PRESS

The Homeland Security Department divided $740 million among 46 cities Wednesday as part of a $1.7 billion counterterrorism grant fund for 2006. While each state will get some money, the grants for cities make up the largest chunk of the funding, which has always been the subject of fierce lobbying by local leaders and members of Congress.

A state-by-state look at what the cities got this year, compared to 2005:

ARIZONA. Phoenix: $3.9 million in 2006, $9.9 million in 2005.

CALIFORNIA. Anaheim/Santa Ana: $11.9 million, down from $19.8 million; San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose-Bay Area: $28.3 million, $33 million; Los Angeles/Long Beach: $80.6 million, $69 million; Sacramento: $7.3 million from $6 million; San Diego: $7.9 million from $14.7 million.

COLORADO. Denver: $4.3 million, down from $8.7 million.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (encompasses the National Capital Region, including Washington and its Maryland and Virginia suburbs). $46.4 million from $77.5 million.

FLORIDA. Ft. Lauderdale: $9.9 million, from zero; Jacksonville: $9.2 million, from $6.8 million; Miami: $15.9 million, from $15.8 million; Orlando: $9.4 million, from zero; Tampa: $8.8 million, from $7.7 million.

GEORGIA. Atlanta: $18.6 million, down from $13.1 million.

HAWAII. Honolulu: $4.7 million, from $6.4 million.

ILLINOIS. Chicago: $52.2 million, from $45 million.

INDIANA. Indianapolis: $4.3 million, from $5.6 million.

KENTUCKY. Louisville: $8.5 million, from $5 million.

LOUISIANA. Baton Rouge: $3.7 million, from $5.2 million; New Orleans: $4.6 million, from $9.3 million.

MASSACHUSSETS. Boston: $18.2 million, from $26 million.

MARYLAND. Baltimore: $9.6 million, from $11.3 million.

MICHIGAN. Detroit: $18.6 million, from $17 million.

MINNESOTA. Minneapolis/St. Paul: $4.3 million, from $5.7 million.

MISSOURI. Kansas City: $9.2 million, from $8.2 million; St. Louis: $9.2 million, from $7 million.

NORTH CAROLINA. Charlotte: $8.9 million, from $5.4 million.

NEBRASKA. Omaha: $8.3, from $5.1 million.

NEW JERSEY. Jersey City/Newark: $34.3 million, from $19 million.

NEVADA. Las Vegas: $7.7 million, from $8.4 million.

NEW YORK. Buffalo: $3.7 million, from $7.2 million; New York City: $124 million, from $207 million.

OHIO. Cincinnati: $4.6 million, from $5.8 million; Cleveland: $4.7 million, from $7.3 million; Columbus: $4.3 million, from $7.5 million; Toledo: $3.8 million, from $5.3 million.

OKLAHOMA. Oklahoma City: $4.1 million, from $5.5 million.

OREGON. Portland: $9.3 million, from $10.3 million.

PENNSYLVANIA. Philadelphia: $19.5 million, from $22.8 million; Pittsburgh: $4.8 million, from $9.6 million.

TENNESSEE. Memphis: $4.2 million, from zero.

TEXAS. Dallas/Fort Worth/Arlington: $13.8 million, from $24 million; Houston: $16.6 million, from $18.5 million; San Antonio: $4.4 million, from $5.9 million.

WASHINGTON. Seattle: $9.1 million, from $11.8 million.

WISCONSIN. Milwaukee: $8.5 million, from $6.3 million.

---interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[kosar]

What's so 'interesting' about it? Your numbers pretty much confirm what we've been talking about. Yes, of course, NY got the most money. I just wonder what compelled them to almost cut in half their funding and to say that there are no landmarks there. That's possibly the most ridiculous thing i've heard yet.

If those numbers are right, Omaha only went up 62%, not the 82% that I saw on Fox the other day.

You have to go with percentages, Wayne. How can you compare raw numbers when talking about NYC and some place like Omaha?

And how about DC getting cut by 40% also. That's 'interesting' as well. The two targets on 9/11 getting cut by 40%.

I know you loathe those two places because of all the gays and blacks, but I would think even you would find that strange.

 

[AR182]

What's so 'interesting' about it? Your numbers pretty much confirm what we've been talking about. Yes, of course, NY got the most money. I just wonder what compelled them to almost cut in half their funding and to say that there are no landmarks there. That's possibly the most ridiculous thing i've heard yet.

If those numbers are right, Omaha only went up 62%, not the 82% that I saw on Fox the other day.

You have to go with percentages, Wayne. How can you compare raw numbers when talking about NYC and some place like Omaha?

And how about DC getting cut by 40% also. That's 'interesting' as well. The two targets on 9/11 getting cut by 40%.

I know you loathe those two places because of all the gays and blacks, but I would think even you would find that strange.

one of the reasons that i heard why some places are getting less funding than in previous years is that the previous funding made places like ny & wash.better prepared to deal with a terroist attack.....

now they want to aid other places to get better prepared for an attack...

when it's put l;ike that....it makes sense. however i cannot see places like nebraska or missouri being a threat for an attack...

i would imagine that the terrorists would want to hit places where there are a large volume of people at one time...ie..wall st., subways, etc....

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Top 5 cities benefits 05 and 06
New York 331 mil
DC 123.9 mil
L.A. 149.6 mil
Chicago 97.2 mil
San Fran 61.3 mil

others receiving over 20 mil in a year
New Jersey 34 mil/06
Mass 26 mil/-05

the top 5 cities again get the bulk (42%) this year

I guess no one else noted what ALL these cities have in common--Yep liberal --no profiling--no military on campus- ACLU strongholds that think they have the right solutions but when it comes times to live by their convictions--its the same ole song and dance--Help me help me!

----and poor ole Nerbraska gets the media 82% hype because it sounds so much better than saying $8.3, from $5.1 million.

Yep they want to feed you an "image in your mind" not the facts--
I'm sure they could figure out how to equate $4.2 million, from zero on Memphis -- they would have been their % posture child.

---then sit back and consider what other aspects these 5 cities have in common--and they think the whole country should follow in their footsteps.

P.S. a lot of these cities were decreased because they had not yet spent money from last year--of course that data has some how escaped the press.

 

[smurphy]

Uh, 3 of those top 5 are the biggest cities in the country. You think maybe that has more to do with it than your "liberal" label? One of the others is the nation's capital - so that may be the reason a little more than "liberal". As for SF.....ok, I'll give you that one - although it's more likely because it's probably the most densely populated city behind New York. It's unique geography makes it a pretty obvious target.

 

[Pujo21]

The New York Dailly News on friday has an article/poll showing Bush the worst President since WWII.

Brother are they right... he is the worst perhaps ever.

 

[blgstocks]

Uh, 3 of those top 5 are the biggest cities in the country. You think maybe that has more to do with it than your "liberal" label? One of the others is the nation's capital - so that may be the reason a little more than "liberal". As for SF.....ok, I'll give you that one - although it's more likely because it's probably the most densely populated city behind New York. It's unique geography makes it a pretty obvious target.

Was thinking the same thing about the cities being the largest in population instead of being liberal cities.
But i dont know what "unique geography makes san fran a obvious target"?????
Anyway, Living in Long Beach we hear all the time about the Port of Long Beach, where a very high % of all imports are coming into California each day. It is the perfect terrorist target. Thousands of large frieght carriers coming in to a very densely populated city, and within a few miles of LA as well. Oh and there are very few hands at the port that cannot possibly check even half of the freight coming in.
Terrorist know that they can put a very large bomb onto a boat coming from another part of the world, that is heading to a destination with hundreds of other boats from all over the world all unloading hundreds of large freight carriers that are being passed through by port hands that can't possibly check them all. I would think Long Beach would be very high on the governments list of cities to secure. More so than even LA, San Fran, or Chicago which cannot be unsuspiciously accessed from the outside world except through planes, which airport security is a must but i would imagine much easier and cheaper than maintaining a port.

 

[djv]

There's plenty cash there to do what is needed for the country. Just have to take a little tax cut money back from the million dollar club and over. What are we spending on that bill 3 billion. They can get a easy 5 billion just by waveng some of that tax cut for those big dogs. We all have a lot to lose. But those cats got plenty more to lose then 95% of us. Im sure they would be willing if the money could only go for national security here at home not over seas.