Skip to comments.
Al Qaeda Is ‘Laughing,' Bloomberg Tells Congress
New York Sun ^
| 01/09/07
| RUSSELL BERMAN
Posted on 01/10/2007 6:16:37 AM PST by presidio9
As Mayor Bloomberg scolded the federal government for "foolishness" in allocating homeland security grants, the city's congressional delegation is gearing up to use its greater political weight in a Democratic majority to bring more anti-terror dollars to the five boroughs.
Testifying before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the mayor lambasted both Congress and the Bush administration for enacting regulations and formulas that he said limit the city's ability to collect its fair share of security funding.
Mr. Bloomberg and other city officials have long called for the Department of Homeland Security to dole out its annual grant money based on risk level alone, criticizing the government for reserving a portion of the pot for localities across the country that appear to face little threat of a terrorist attack.
While the Bush administration has taken steps recently to increase threat-based funding, it has not gone far enough, Mr. Bloomberg said yesterday.
"Instead, we have seen huge sums of homeland security money spread across the country like peanut butter," he told the committee.
-snip-
Some lawmakers have said that a nationwide homeland security funding system is appropriate, suggesting that terrorists will not always aim for iconic structures like the Empire State Building or the Brooklyn Bridge but could go after the nation's food supply by attacking farm land, or strike a crowded arena or mall in Middle America. Mr. Bloomberg challenged that claim directly in his testimony before the Senate: "Do not confuse risks with targets. Every place there are risks, but there aren't that many targets and targets are what the enemies of this country will focus on."
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
TOPICS: Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: New York; War on Terror
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-222 next last
To: justshutupandtakeit
"His Honor is correct in that the targets will not be in small towns. What glory is there in bringing down a one story double wide?"
Beslan, Russia
21
posted on
01/10/2007 6:41:16 AM PST
by
TET1968
(SI MINOR PLUS EST ERGO NIHIL SUNT OMNIA)
To: presidio9
Bloomberg is proof that NYC produces some of the most idiotic politicians in the nation. Al Queda is laughing at us more because we(as a nation) have become soft and putting the Rats in charge of the Congress is proof of that. They were probably ROTFL the day after the November elections because the American Sheeple bought the Rats and the American media's propaganda.
22
posted on
01/10/2007 6:41:59 AM PST
by
The South Texan
(The Democrat Party and the leftist (ABCCBSNBCCNN NYLATIMES)media are a criminal enterprise!)
To: popdonnelly
In the interest of National Security,give NYC $200,000 earmarked for investigating Charlie Rangle.
23
posted on
01/10/2007 6:44:30 AM PST
by
TET1968
(SI MINOR PLUS EST ERGO NIHIL SUNT OMNIA)
To: presidio9
Laughing out of the other side of their faces, if faces can be found after an AC-130 strike.
24
posted on
01/10/2007 6:44:57 AM PST
by
dighton
To: justshutupandtakeit
--His Honor is correct in that the targets will not be in small towns. What glory is there in bringing down a one story double wide?--
Never say never. Over-confidence leads to failure.
To: presidio9
Al-qaeda laughed when New Yorker's elected Bloomberg. Since the alternative, the nader-raider moe green, was an even bigger joke, the joke was on them.
26
posted on
01/10/2007 6:45:29 AM PST
by
AdvisorB
To: presidio9
IMHO Bloomberg, like most liberals, believe 911 was a bunch of bad guys who ATTACKED NEW YORK's iconic WTC, killing people who worked in NEW YORK.
The concept that the UNITED STATES of AMERICA was attacked that day escapes them!!
27
posted on
01/10/2007 6:46:00 AM PST
by
PISANO
To: TET1968
Beslan, Russia
Good point. It's like winning a bad lottery. Given the numbers of small cities as opposed to large, your chances of being in that particular city are small. That's small consolation if you happen to be in that small city on that particular day.
28
posted on
01/10/2007 6:47:25 AM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Peace without victory is a temporary illusion.)
To: presidio9
It's fair share? From each according to ability, to each according to need?
The 9-11 hijackers had residence in Florida. Dearbornistan seems to be a likely place for at lease SOME radical Isalmic supremacists to be plotting.
Should the funds just go to build up infrastructure around likely targets or should it also go towards monitoring and investigation (of things like trucking and flight schools)?
29
posted on
01/10/2007 6:49:20 AM PST
by
weegee
("Vote Obama - For More Ears!")
To: justshutupandtakeit
If anthrax is again mailed out, it can be sent from a small town and still affect Big Town USA as it contaminates the US Postal Service's equipment.
How small a town could still pose a valuable target? Houston has a major port, major medical center (including research), NASA mission control, Halliburton, and Big Oil. Did I mention our city leadership is incompetent and couldn't manage traffic in a precautious evacuation resulting in a 36 hour traffic jam that streched at least 90 miles in every direction outbound?
30
posted on
01/10/2007 6:54:08 AM PST
by
weegee
("Vote Obama - For More Ears!")
To: golfboy; From many - one.; ErnBatavia; EQAndyBuzz; cripplecreek; Brilliant; justshutupandtakeit; ...
With all due respect, I submit that most of the terror funding should go to New York and DC. They are more likely to get hit than the rest of the nation combined. There are many reasons why Manhattan is the most likely target:
1) Osama bin Laden has said specifically that he will hit New York again.
2) Manhattan has a population density of 67,000 per square mile before you count the 1mm tourist who are in the city on any given day and the fact that commuters double the population every day. The next closest city is San Francisco with 16,000 people per square mile.
3) New York is the financial capital of the world.
4) The only city that can challenge NY for symbolic targets is Washington, DC.
5) All of the major news media outlets are headquartered in Manhattan, ensuring the fullest coverage.
6) The United Nations is headquartered in Manhattan.
7) New York is the cultural capital of the western world.
8) There are 2mm Jews living in NYC. There are 360,000 living in Tel Aviv.
There are many more, but you get the idea. Since 9/11 we have been able to prevent three attempted subway bombings that we know about (with one convicted terrorist being sentenced to 30 years yesterday), one plot against the Lincoln Tunnel, and one against the Brooklyn Bridge. That we know about. Obviously they are going to try again. Soon.
Is it possible that there is another Timothy McVeigh out there? Of course. But we know that a million or so Islamofacists are out there with an axe for us and especially Manhatttan. And that's what these funds were designed to protect us from.
31
posted on
01/10/2007 6:54:49 AM PST
by
presidio9
(It's "news" that New Jersey smells bad?)
To: PISANO
It would seem that they forget that the flights originated outside of NYC and that Washington DC was also attacked that day.
New York was not attacked, AMERICA was attacked.
We were attacked when the USS Cole was attacked. We were attacked when the US Embassy was attacked.
32
posted on
01/10/2007 6:55:42 AM PST
by
weegee
("Vote Obama - For More Ears!")
To: weegee
Dearbornistan seems to be a likely place for at least SOME radical Isalmic supremacists to be plotting.
It's a matter of how the money would be spent. I think Detroit is somewhat less likely as a target of a major city wide attack due to the large numbers of muslims. Money would be better spent on surveillance in Detroit than on protection.
33
posted on
01/10/2007 6:57:08 AM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Peace without victory is a temporary illusion.)
To: libertylover
This incredible arrogance is why so many dislike NY and LA. This isn't about arrogance, and its not about dissing other cities. It's common sense. LA's low population density makes it a highly unlikely target. It only has 6,000 people per square mile. Medwestern cities like Kansas City have about 1,000 people per square mile. Not as much bang for your buck.
34
posted on
01/10/2007 6:57:44 AM PST
by
presidio9
(It's "news" that New Jersey smells bad?)
To: presidio9
The world is laughing at Bloomy for allowing a fart to shut down Manhattan.
To: presidio9
In other news, I heard an announcement this morning that New York City is projecting a
$2 billion budget surplus this year.
So in addition to paying their police recruits more than $25,000 per year (as per the previous thread on this topic), Mike Bloomberg can certainly fund whatever security measures the city needs without going to Washington with his hand held out.
36
posted on
01/10/2007 6:58:26 AM PST
by
Alberta's Child
(Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
To: justshutupandtakeit
A terrorist attack in the heartland of America could be just as chilling as 9/11 was.
I cite this as a horrible possibility:
An jihadi walks into a day care center in Newton IA or Aberdeen SD.
He's got a bomb vest full of explosives, nail, screws, etc. He blows himself up in a room full of pre-schoolers. Ends up killing 20 or 30 little kids and the adult day-care workers.
In rural America, people may not feel as acutely in danger as New York or DC - but an attack like this would jolt America to the core and make them realize "Yes, these bastards can hit us anywhere - even in small town America".
The repercussions of an attack like that would be beyond belief.
To: popdonnelly
The Democrats think that Homeland Security money should be dealt out like all other pork. Actually it looks more like Homeland Security is punishing New York for voting Democrat, and that's reprehensible.
38
posted on
01/10/2007 6:58:55 AM PST
by
presidio9
(It's "news" that New Jersey smells bad?)
To: cripplecreek
When You give sanctuary to illegal immigrants, you give sanctuary to potential terrorists. Terrorists are educated and well-funded. They can enter this country legally on student visas. Illegal immigration is a serious issue, but it is a distraction when we are talking about the much greater threat of terroism.
39
posted on
01/10/2007 7:00:29 AM PST
by
presidio9
(It's "news" that New Jersey smells bad?)
To: presidio9
I understand your point. Obviously NY is a high profile and highly desirable target. I'm more concerned that the money won't be spent correctly.
40
posted on
01/10/2007 7:00:58 AM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Peace without victory is a temporary illusion.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-222 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson