I never claimed the threat was reduced. In fact, nothing can reduce the threat. Anybody can be killed, assassinated, kidnapped, etc. regardless of how much is spend on security and precautions.
As far as other "soft targets", isn't that what he is upset about? Other areas that may become more of a target getting "undue" moneys?
Look New York City IS the number one target. Cutting funding 40% with the snippy comments the Homeland Security official made to Peter King shows the mentality of some of those folks.
Peter King says they've changed their story five time in less than 2 days.
Based on all of that, he has a right to be pissed. And I'm glad he is.
Yes, the threat can be reduced but "other areas" getting "undue" monies is besides the point. The engine of the country and the focal point of New York is not leaving the radar screen of terrorists any time soon.
Again, Peter King is right to be angry. He's doing his job for the region as he's a Congressman from Long Island (about 30 miles from NYC).