But seriously folks, screw the landmarks - we should be thinking LIVES

[LynneSin]

I keep reading about how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) cut the funding in half to both NYC and DC with the reason that there were "no significant landmarks or icons" to protect.

Personally, I don't care if Times Square or the Brooklyn Bridge or the Washington Monument gets blown up. In fact the loss of the WTC or damage to the Pentagon was not super upsetting to me.

What I worry about is the people that we lose when a terrorist attack occurs. Five years later and we're already working to rebuild again on the WTC another building but can we ever get back the thousands of lives killed when that building collapsed?

The DHS money should NOT be based upon how many icons & landmarks an area has but how many people are living in that regions ESPECIALLY if they are close to something that could be vulnerable to attacks such as our poorly guarded ports. In NYC metro region you probably have close to 20million people living in that area with three major airports and several large ports all pouring into that region. THAT is the reason we need to protect NYC, not because of Times Square, the Chrysler Building or some other landmark.

So the DH screwed up not because of the landmark/icons but because of the people whose lives they are putting to risk because they are not properly protected

[Deja Q]

1. Agreed.

Let's hope that's what our elected officials meant.

[deaniac21]

2. There isn't really a threat anywhere. It'll never happen again.

[bdamomma]

10. the biggest threat to us right now is how

our deficit keeps growing, and China and other countries will say pay up US. that will kill us right there.

[deaniac21]

13. You must be an economics professor!!

[napi21]

3. You're right, except there should be some consideration given

to what would attract a terrorist attack. Why would they choose one area over another? I doubt it's all about how many people they can kill, but how much fear they can generate in the general population.

I really can see thinking about some extra protection for neuclear plants that many people already fear.

[DLnyc]

4. Blatantly distributing money and services to benefit GOP

IMHO, the money was removed from NYC because we don't like the chimperor. * came in third in many precincts here in 2000 (after Gore and Nader). Therefore, we get a 40 percent cut. The precincts that flooded in NOLA were predominately black and presumably vote 80 or 90 % against *. Therefore, FEMA doesn't arrive and thousands drown.

The * administration is nothing but a trillion-dollar protection racket: "Vote for us or we will starve you to death".

The fact that they are using 9/11 and 'Homeland Security' as emotional blackmail to get votes and dollars, and then cynically distributing funds for political purposes is merely the latest exhibit in an ongoing series of blatantly cynical, partisan and immoral manipulations on the part of the bush crime family.

[LynneSin]

7. You know what's scary about the treatment of New Orleans

Louisana is probably much like Pennsylvania where the major urban areas balance out the rest of the state when it comes to voting. Get rid of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania would be a solid Red state even with Pittsburgh.

Louisana isn't quite a full blown red state. Democrats have won several statewide seats including Governor & one Senator. So how can we push Louisiana completely over to red state?

Well, aren't we lucky - Katrina practically wipes out New Orleans and an area that is probably very predominantly democratic. Almost 9 months later and these people are no where close to returning home with many of them now residing in other states.

Scary hun!

[TahitiNut]

5. Al Qaeda has targeted global corporatism

9/11 was remarkably low on causalties of children and people engaged in purely social/family activities.

Tim McVeigh didn't let a Day Care Center stop him. I don't see the same reckless dismissal in the targets chosen by the (so-called) Islamic Extremists. We're seeing our military forces kill almost insdiscrimantly, either from the air or on the ground. I don't see the same disdain for "collateral damage" from Al Qaeda. The atrocity at the Russian(?) school wasn't al Qaeda, as far as I know.

While the difference isn't total, it seems significant. I'm not under the illusion it'll continue, though. I'm also not under the illusion that everything is as it's claimed to be.

[CatWoman]

6. on another note

I haven't seen you in a while

:hi:

How's Abbott and Evita?

:loveya:

[LynneSin]

8. Both are doing very well

Evita is getting a bit friendlier if only with me. How's your new addition to the family?

[CatWoman]

11. LOL

I told Uly she looks like a beach ball, with a teeny little feline head and a fuzzy tail :D

[johnnie]

9. It's not about any of this

I was never really convinced that they were doing anything additional to protect us from "terra" attacks anyway since 9/11. I think they distributed money to make it look like we are in a war on terra and now that the real agenda is underway, they need to cut back on the bones they threw because they are spending too much on their war in Iraq and phone tappings and other assorted operations that they wanted to do disguised as a "war on terror".

It isn't about icons, monuments or even citizens, it is about an agenda that was put into place in 2000 (or well before) and it has played itself out to their liking.

[Virginia Dare]

12. No amount of money in the world is going to prevent a terrorist act...

where the money needs to go is to first responders and the local public health systems, these are the people that are going to get you out of the deep shit.

The feds aren't.

And yes, that money should be based on population.