· It’s troubling that the Washington Post reports Bush Administration had credible intelligence about the terrorist threats they’re announcing today but held that information for a month. [Washington Post, 5/26/04, A1]
There are terrorist threats detected everyday, but that doesn't mean that they are valid. Releasing invalid information can be just as damaging as not releasing good data as our resources get expended on non-existant threats. It's better to wait and validate the data.
· The best way to prevent terrorist attacks is to prepare, prepare, prepare. That requires two things: sharing intelligence information from the federal government, and equipping our fist responders with the tools they need.
Negative. Remember that first responders are responding to something, not preventing it from happening. Also, sharing intel information is not what we need more of. The problem before 9/11 was that no agency had the authority to ACT on any of the information that they had. We do not need the FBI and the CIA whispering to one another, we need the FBI, CIA, State Police agencies, DIA, etc., pumping info to the Homeland Security folks, so that it can be effectively analyzed, and that's what's happening.
Lastly, there is one, and only one, way to 100% prevent terrorist attacks... an that is to kill the terrorist attackers before they leave for the US or other target country.
· A Government Accounting Office investigation found the process created following 9/11 to share information, “no level of government perceived the process as effective.” John Kerry believes – and I agree -- that appropriate state and local authorities should have immediate access to national terrorist lists and 24-hour operations center should be created to link local and federal law enforcement.
Think about what you're asking for. You want State officials to be out hunting for suspected terrorists when they have neither the resources of capabilities to find them? That's why we're paying the FBI and CIA and others. You start turning state officials into terrorist hunters they'll burn up lots of funding that should be used for regular policing duties and then scream for more money to keep the burglars away. The Feds are funded and much better equipped to deal with hunting down the bad guys.
· The other thing we need as local officials from the Bush Administration are the resources to protect our local communities. A study last fall by the U.S. Conference of Mayors showed 90 percent of cities had not received their share of the $1.5 billion allocated by the nation’s largest homeland security funding program.[AP, 2/12/04]
Good point, but ask yourself... shouldn't there be a priority list for dolling out funding? Shouldn't the mayors of NYC, Miami, LA, Philadelphia, Seattle, etc., get their money before the mayor of Leonardtown or Monroeville, PA? I'm sure that every mayor is salivating at the chance to blow some security money on new swimming pools to drown terrorists in city council members' backyards, but I think the money should go to the places that are the most likely targets.
· On top of that, the Bush Administration has consistently cut funding for the COPS program, which had put more than 100,000 cops on the street.[AP, 2/3/03] This comes at a time when we need our police, our “first responders” more than ever for homeland security.
The COPS program never came close to putting 100,000 new cops on the street, and many of the cops who were hired under COPS are out of work today. COPS paid 1/2 of one man year of salary... that's it. No funds for training or equipment. This meant that only agencies who could afford to cover the other 1/2 man year and other expenses could get funds. This also meant that after the first year if the agency couldn't make up the lost 1/2 man year of funding through attrition of other officers or budget increases, the COPS officer was gone. In the end, about 20,000 new officers were hired with COPS money in big cities, and about 1/3rd of those positions are gone now.
· And the Bush Administration hasn’t done nearly enough to protect ports, rails and chemical plants.
What is "enough" to protect these installations? Build 30-ft walls around them? The terrorists will get a 32-ft ladder. Safety is a game of offense, not defense. A determined attacker always has time on his side, and can always come up with ways around any defense. If you want to be safe you need to wipeout the attacker on his home turf, and that's what Bush is doing.
· It’s also a question of priorities. President Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy cost $2.6 trillion over 10 years. But he’s only dedicated $36 billion per year to homeland security funding. No wonder the International Brotherhood of Police Officers (I.B.P.O.)– who endorsed George Bush in 2000 – are standing with John Kerry this election.
Cops want more money? Holly Cow! Next thing you know the teachers will be saying they need more money too. Once more for the thick headed... you can dump the national treasury into homeland defense and a determined attacker will find a way around your fences, mine fields, moats, etc. You need to get the bad guys BEFORE they can get to you. Offense, Offense, Offense
· For all these reasons, it’s absurd for the Bush campaign to be attacking John Kerry on homeland security. Democrats proposed the creation of the homeland security department after 9-11; it was Bush who led the fight to block it for months.
John Kerry's plan for national security is to secure good-faith promises from our enemies that they won't attack us. Then spend billions of dollars on cops, firemen, and other worthless prevention measures to make us feel safe while securing the support of all those groups. For example, I head today that Kerry says he'll get N. Korea to stop it's nuc weapons programs within four years. Yeah... just like Clinton and Carter did. He'll claim victory when N. Korea says "okay... we'll stop" and then it will fall onto the next Republican president to do something when we find out they lied... again.
Lastly, recent events have shown that Kerry's buddies in France and Germany have no qualms about selling out the US of A if there are a few Francs or Deutchmarks in it for them. Are these the people you want to rely on to help keep the US safe???
· His plan calls for: 1) Enlist the National Guard and Americorps in Homeland Security efforts to create community defense services 2) Ensure that first defenders are equipped and ready 3) Bring information technology to War on Terror 4) Reforming domestic intelligence 5) Implement public health initiatives and 6) Improve port security, bridges, tunnels and private infrastructure. [Kerry remarks regarding the “Preparedness Gap” New York, NY 7/16/03]
1. If Kerry is doing his job, option 1 shouldn't be needed. The terrorist operations should be destroyed overseas BEFORE they arrive here. Also, do you really want your mailman or the idiot down the street snooping on your house because he thinks you might be a terrorist? I would rather have an FBI agent watching my house because they've traced suspicious funds transfers or I've been calling 1-800-fund-terror a few too many times.
2. Again, first responders respond, they don't defend (even if you tried to sneak that title in.)
3. It's already in there!
4. Already been done... it's called the Department of Homeland Security... you might want to check into it.
5. I agree with you 100% on that one. Let's get the innoculations warming up in the bullpen.
6. One last time... you'll never be able to 100% defend these facilities and structures without making them unuseable... which does the terrororists work for them. Focus on killing the terrorists.
