Fine, then they shouldn't ask for my tax dollars, either.Originally Posted by ablarc
And of course we all know that the Feds themselves have such a good track record at protecting the country from attacks / disasters. Hypocritical bastards.Originally Posted by BigMac
But aren't they ultimately signed off by humans. They think we're stupid or somethin'?A Homeland Security spokesman insisted New York's cut was based on a powerful new matrix that crunches millions of bits of data to figure out where money is most needed.
Mr. Knocke, be ready to eat those words and my foot if something does happens. Bastard."We're quite frankly getting highly sophisticated in our ability to analyze threat," said Russ Knocke.
Fine, then they shouldn't ask for my tax dollars, either.Originally Posted by ablarc
June 2, 2006
City Has Itself to Blame for Terror Cuts, U.S. Says
By AL BAKER and DIANE CARDWELL
The federal agency distributing $711 million in antiterrorism money to cities around the nation found numerous flaws in New York City's application and gave poor grades to many of its proposals.
Its criticism extended to some of the city's most highly publicized counterterrorism measures.
In a report that outlines why it cut back New York City's share of antiterrorism funds by roughly 40 percent, the Department of Homeland Security was so critical of some highly viewed local measures — like Operation Atlas, in which hundreds of extra police officers carry out counterterrorism duties around the city each day — that the Police Department and other city agencies must now seek further federal approval before drawing on the money they were given to pay for those programs.
In a flurry of charges and countercharges, federal officials said yesterday that the city not only did a poor job of articulating its needs in its application, but it also mishandled the application itself, failing to file it electronically as required and instead faxing its request to Washington.
City and state officials insisted that they had made no mistakes. And a state official provided a written acknowledgement from the federal government saying that the city's application for grant money has been "successfully submitted" and said that the city could "log in" any time to view the application.
New York City received $124.5 million from the Department of Homeland Security, about 40 percent less than the $207.5 million it received the year before. Many smaller cities around the country, like Charlotte, N.C., saw their shares increase sharply.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg questioned yesterday whether old-fashioned pork barrel politics was at play in doling out the money in an election year. He was one of several elected officials who moved on different tracks to uncover how the decisions were made, with an eye toward revising that process.
"We tried to do an analysis of some of the moneys and whether or not they were given out for political reasons, and in fact in many of the places where they got money — but arguably there's no threat — there are close elections either at the Senate level or the House level," the mayor said. "Now, whether that was their motive I have no idea."
The White House tried to minimize the effect on New York. The grants will be reconsidered each year and could change if "some grand and unforeseen need arises," said Tony Snow, the White House press secretary. "The point of homeland security, as I said before, is to provide security for the entire homeland," he said. "And certainly no disrespect meant to New York with $124 million for this coming year."
The report, obtained yesterday, pointed out opposing views held by cities and the federal government over how antiterrorism money should be spent and, as an extension of those views, how terrorism should be fought.
City officials have used federal money to subsidize continuing costs, like paying overtime to officers. The federal government, on the other hand, wants the grants to pay for semipermanent safeguards that can increase security over the long term, like improvements in communications systems, better gas masks and increased training.
The report faulted the city for not adequately explaining why the money being requested could reduce risks.
Though the report said the city was in the top 25 percent of urban areas at risk, it rated the city in the bottom 25 percent in the quality of its application. It rated the Police Department's counterterrorism program and Operation Atlas as below average in sustainability, a criticism of the continuing overtime costs.
Eight of the city's programs including the counterterrorism division and Operation Atlas, as well as some health and training programs — fell in the bottom 15 percent, meaning any federal money used toward them will need to be specifically approved.
Elected city officials were especially stunned that the report said New York had no national monuments or icons. The city's application was evaluated by so-called peer-review panels of five to seven people with varying backgrounds from 47 states and affirmed by government analysts at the Department of Homeland Security.
Angry officials in New York zeroed in on the peer review process yesterday, trying to determine who evaluated the programs and whether their judgments were clouded by a desire to steer security money to their own areas. City officials questioned whether the reviewers had expertise in antiterrorism efforts.
Members of New York's Congressional delegation presented a united front in pledging action to change the allocations. Representative Peter T. King, a Republican and chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said he would hold hearings to investigate the process, while Senators Charles E. Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton, both Democrats, wrote letters to Michael Chertoff, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, demanding a full explanation.
In Washington, Mayor Anthony A. Williams described the decision to cut his city's allocation by 40 percent as shortsighted.
A spokeswoman, Sharon Gang, said the Homeland Security Department did not give much of a rationale for the cuts and that their proposals rated average or above average on almost all counts.
"It sounds like they made a unilateral, gut decision not based on our application," Ms. Gang said. "And they scored other locations higher."
Officials in New York said the impact of the cash drain would be felt.
"We have a counterterrorism center that would deal with all of the potential scenarios that we have been studying that we have to be prepared for that could be dramatically affected by any cut in funding," said Fire Commissioner Nicholas A. Scoppetta. "It's as though Washington is not going to be convinced of the need until they have another terrible incident in a place like New York or Washington."
Paul J. Browne, a senior aide to Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly and the department's chief spokesman, said: "The N.Y.P.D. will continue to do what it needs to do to keep the city safe," he said. "We'll just be doing it without D.H.S. stepping up to the level expected of it."
He said the department's counterterrorism work had been essential in defending the city since 9/11 "What more evidence do they need?" he said.
Stephen C. King, a lawyer who specializes in emergency-response and domestic security issues at Hunton & Williams in New York, said he could not understand the 40 percent cut to the city. "I'll have to look at it closer," he said, "but I can't wrap my arms around that one."
Though the federal officials said the city did not file properly, the city said state officials filed its package, and a state official said its package of applications was filed electronically on March 2, the deadline.
In an interview, George W. Foresman, under secretary for preparedness as the Department of Homeland Security, applauded some of the security work being done by New York, while raising the question of just what is the proper use of the federal funds.
"Do you pay for what are viewed as basic capabilities; law enforcement, fire, E.M.S., public health, emergency management?" he asked. "Whose role is it to pay for that, versus whose role is it to pay for specialized training and equipment for fire, E.M.S. and law enforcement?"
Mr. Chertoff said yesterday: "There was no suggestion about anything we did that New York is not the No. 1 terror target. But I do think it's fair to ask this question: After a city gets $500 million, more than twice as much as the next-largest city, is it correct to assume they should continue to get the same amount of money year after year after year after year with everybody else dividing up what remains?"
Still, Mr. Schumer called the episode an "absurdity," saying the grading system did not make sense.
"It would be as if you got 800's on your boards and Stanford Law School rejected you because you put the stamp on upside down," he said.
Reporting for this article was contributed by Kareem Fahim, Winnie Hu, Eric Lipton and Jim Rutenberg.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Now that is a serious lapse. The city should be made to pay for that one with several thousand deaths.Originally Posted by Kris
Or maybe these federal outlays don't have the potential to reduce deaths. Maybe they should be scrapped altogether?
I'm not overly concerned about this cut in funding. It will simply force NYPD to establish priorities. Although NYPD is still the greatest, it's not serious about terrorist activity. If it were, it wouldn't waste one dime on its idiotic jack-booted speed traps on I-95 and the Clearview Expressway. Oh yeah...those people doing 70 MPH are real terrorists, alright. And NYPD is really using its resources wisely. Uh huh.
DC is full of idiotic bums. They shouldn't even consider them-selves as patriots, if they're not going to defend the countries largest and most imminent terrorist targets. Homeland Security is an agency with MAJOR flaws. Chertoff went as far as to say that there weren't any landmarks to defend in NYC. Is that a joke? I'm not laughing. And for some reason they cut funds to the two cities that were attacked on 9/11. What is the logic behind that. Then they give us illogical excuses. Thanks Homeland Security for screwing Americans once again.
Since when is a landmark a target?
WTC was just "lucky" to be a major hub AND a landmark.
If any of teh bridges were taken out, or a bomb went off on Wall Street, I think the effect would be more pronounced than just property damage.
New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
She gave us the ax
BY MICHAEL McAULIFF in Washington
and TRACY CONNOR in New York
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Friday, June 2nd, 2006
The Homeland Security official who signed off on funding cuts for New York and extra cash for the heartland is a small-town gal whose back-door appointment to the job was mired in controversy.
Tracy Henke, 37, assistant secretary for grants and training, wasn't quickly confirmed by the U.S. Senate after her nomination last year because of allegations she played politics in her previous post.
So an impatient White House appointed her while Congress was in recess, drawing howls of outrage from lawmakers and sparking questions about her qualifications.
After six months on the job, Henke is already on President Bush's radar screen - he thanked her by name yesterday for help on immigration reform, even as her anti-terrorism funding handiwork was being pilloried.
Henke is from Moscow Mills, Mo., a town of 1,700 that touts a strip-mall pizzeria, a tractor dealership and a Citgo station as amenities on its Web site.
She majored in political science at the University of Missouri and worked for two GOP senators from her home state, John Danforth and then Kit Bond.
Incidentally, Henke just approved funding increases for two Missouri cities. St. Louis' funding increased by 24% and Kansas City, Mo., got an extra 12%.
Another Missouri native, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, brought Henke to the Department of Justice, where she oversaw a grant program and the Office of Domestic Preparedness.
At Justice, she caused an uproar when she demanded changes to a press release about a study that found minorities were more likely to be arrested or handcuffed during traffic stops.
Accusations that she undermined the objectivity of the department dogged her when the White House submitted her name for the high-level Homeland Security job the next year.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) questioned whether Henke had "politicized" the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and he fumed when the White House gave her the job before her nomination was even voted on.
White House spokeswoman Erin Healy said Henke's appointment was pushed through because the Senate dragged its heels. "She's a highly talented individual who has an impressive record," she said.
Before Henke had her say on funding levels, Homeland Security relied on an anonymous panel of more than 100 reviewers to rate security plans from around the country.
According to sources and documents obtained by the Daily News, the department drew the reviewers evenly from 48 states, 43 cities, three territories and several federal agencies.
Many were officials from emergency management offices or grant experts. They were each given 60 projects to evaluate - with about an hour per project - before meeting for a week in April in Emmitsburg, Md., to hash out the results.
That's where New York City's terror plans ended up rated among the nation's worst. Homeland Security officials refused to discuss how they decided New York City had no national monuments and few major banking institutions.
man that's a small town!!!
I very much hope that all that noise and outrage that was sparked by this dumb decision will lead the Homeland Security department to reconsider it. I think Chertoff is in big trouble. One of the reasons he got such a ennthusiastic support was from the NY/NJ congressional delegation who thought he would allocate the security money based on threat level. They though that the very fact that he is from NJ and was a judge there would make him more sympathetic to the needs of New Yorkers. Now, all NY senators are going to war aganist him. And after Katrina debacle, he does not have much fuel to go on. I think he is toast.
We can't get rid of this gang of thieves soon enough ...
Lol,Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp
She definitely didn't get the job for her looks!
I bet Missouri is real proud.
Make her lose 75 pounds and I think she would be a real cutie.
I wasn't able to find any pics of her from when she was appointed to all these posts....
I think we can't even use this pig to guard food supplies for the NYPD.
Tracy Henke "file" at SourceWatch
Henke page at DHS
DHS GRANT page
CONTACT info at DHS:
To reach the Department of Homeland Security headquarters please write to or call:
U.S. Department of Homeland SecurityCitizen Line:
Washington, D.C. 20528
Operator Number: 202-282-8000
Comment Line: 202-282-8495