Posted on 08/12/2006 5:13:39 AM PDT by seasoned traditionalist
JOHN SOLOMON As the British terror plot was unfolding, the Bush administration quietly tried to take away $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new explosives detection technology.
Homeland Security's research arm, called the Sciences & Technology Directorate, is a "rudderless ship without a clear way to get back on course," Republican and Democratic senators on the Appropriations Committee declared recently. The administration also was slow to start testing a new liquid explosives detector that the Japanese government provided to the United States earlier this year.
The department failed to spend $200 million in research and development money from past years, forcing lawmakers to rescind the money this summer.
(Excerpt) Read more at comcast.net ...
Is there no limit to stupidity and incompetence of the primary agency charged with our protection and security?
"Homeland Security is spending a total of $732 million this year on various explosives deterrents. It has tested several commercial liquid explosive detectors over the past few years but hasn't been satisfied enough with the results to deploy them.
For MORE THAN FOUR YEARS, officials inside Homeland Security also have debated whether to deploy smaller trace explosive detectors _ already in most American airports _ to foreign airports to help stop any bomb chemicals or devices from making it onto U.S.-destined flights. (Emphasis added)
"A 2002 Homeland Security report recommended "immediate deployment" of the trace units to key European airports, highlighting their low cost, $40,000 per unit, and their detection capabilities. The report said one such unit was able, 25 days later, to detect explosives residue inside the airplane where convicted shoe bomber Richard Reid was foiled in December 2001.
Tony Fainberg, who formerly oversaw Homeland Security's explosive and radiation detection research with the national labs, said he strongly urged deployment of the detectors overseas but was rebuffed."
"It is not that expensive," said Fainberg, who recently retired. "There was no resistance from any country that I was aware of, and yet we didn't deploy it."
WHERE IS PRESIDENT BUSH AND WHY IS HIS LEADERSHIP LEFT WANTING?
Actions speak louder than words.
That F'n, bumbling, PC, idiot, (Chertoff) is W's "boy-wonder" and that old saying "The Buck Stops Here," needs to be applied and someone needs to shake that agency up from top to bottom. IMHO.
While I'm skeptical of anything that comes from the Apropriated Press, I am bewildered and very interested in the justification for the following, if accurate:
"The administration's most recent budget request also mystified lawmakers. It asked to take $6 million from the Sciences & Technology Directorate's 2006 budget that was supposed to be used to develop explosives detection technology and divert it to cover a budget shortfall in the Federal Protective Service, which provides security around government buildings.
If this were any other issue we'd be saying unspent money merely means specific projects didn't need it, and that it's GOOD that they weren't just tossing money around on useless stuff and instead were waiting until the funds were needed specifically.
But some folks take AP stories at face-value and help the MSM with their "Bush isn't doing enough against terrorism" propaganda.
”Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result." -- Albert Einstein
Indeed. Like believing AP stories and their obvious political slant over, and over.
Funny how the LOUDEST of squealers about Federal Spending mindlessly regurgitates the propaganda put out by pork barreling politicians who are lobbying for big fat Fed Government Checks to be sent to their home town fat cat corporate lobby groups to do this "Research".
But then for the Freeper DNC Virtual Campaigners posturing as "Betrayed Conservatives" it not about FACT, it about finding the latest thing to scream their hate and bile at the Bush Administration over.
Remember, you cannot just kill an agency in Washington. You must starve it to death through the budget.
They are taking the money away from an incompetent research group and putting it elsewhere so they can create a new research group in the future.
Remember, liquid component detection is not possible if they are placed inside a sealed container with no external contamination...there is nothing to detect by automated means.
Hand searches of people and baggage will become necessary.
The method to sneak explosive components onto a plane right now is known....even with today's hightened security.....by normal boarding. I won't get into the method details, but those bombs can still go off any moment.
Translation: "We here at AP have found a way to blame Bush for the UK plot."
Hawley said Homeland Security is now going to test the detector in six American airports. "It is very promising technology, and we are extremely interested in it to help us operationally in the next several years," he said. Japan has been using the liquid explosive detectors in its Narita International Airport in Tokyo and demonstrated the technology to U.S. officials at a conference in January, the Japanese Embassy in Washington said. Homeland Security is spending a total of $732 million this year on various explosives deterrents. It has tested several commercial liquid explosive detectors over the past few years but hasn't been satisfied enough with the results to deploy them.
Please explain what exactly in that shows anything like the claims made by you or the opening of the article.
Great post. I think too many people think "Why isn't there some expensive machine taking care of this?" and that's as far as their thinking on this goes.
Perhaps in the future instead of just regurgitating your mindless bigotry and hate for President Bush you MIGHT actually try READING the story. Notice the line above? Be incredibly stupid to waste billions setting up substandard detectors at every US Airport. In case you missed it, We have quite a few more Airports then either Great Britain or Japan and would be making a much much greater capital investment.
Hi Darkwolf...
Are we uncovering someone here? Am I possibly IBTZ?
Hmmmm.... Your zot detector is working better than mine.
Notice how the article is a total hit-piece intending to portray one thing, while deep in the piece it reveals just the opposite--that the DHS is indeed testing the equipment, though the article focuses on the funding not being used.
One guaranteed way to tell a liberal is when they post articles crying that not enough hundreds of millions are being spent, NOT whether or not the program works fine without those millions.
So which part of the story is President Bush and the Republicans fault--the part where they're not putting shoody equipment on the front lines and are waiting till they find something that works?
Would you rather they toss money down the drain with equipment that is of no use, but at least LOOKS cool in the airport terminal?
This story has an unmistakable odor to it. It was MNJohnnie's comments right after yours that made me look at the poster's registration.
Who knows. The poster may be legit. Uh, huh.
Well, buddy boy, perhaps if you and others who are quick to trash me were not midless, robotic W-apologists and supporters, regardless of what policies he advocates and advances (SUCH AS THE ILLEGAL SHAMNESTY PROGRAM--WHICH YOU NO DOUBT SUPPORT?)and the amazing stupidty and idiotic policies of the DHLS (WHICH YOU ALSO PROBABLY SLAVISHLY ADHERE TO?)then perhaps you would not be so adverse and keep a little more open mind about someone even "questioning" what is important for our security and defense?
Since when, is is "verbotten" mein heir, to criticize our illustrious leader or his cabinet appointments?
Perhaps, in addition to being satisfied with Chertoff and his moronic policies within DHLS, you are no doubt thrilled with W's pick of Mueller to head the FBI?
The very same Mueller whose agents were "required" to attend "Muslim Sensitivity Training Classes" taught by CAIR?
When it comes that I, or anyone else cannot question or criticize President Bush (WHO, BY THE WAY I VOTED FOR TWICE, A*HOLE) or any other Gov't Agency, then its time I join the muzzies who are trying to destroy us and take away our rights to criticize ANYTHING OR ANYONE.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST, I WILL GLADLY MATCH MY 63 YEARS' RECORD OF "CONSERVATIVISM" AND PATRIOTISM--INCLUDING 8 YEARS USAF AND 18 MONTHS IN NAM--AGAINST YOURS, MY FRIEND, OR ANYONE ELSE WHO POSTS HEREIN
I see don't bother you with the facts on this, you would rather cling to your ignorace and knee jerk hate then have to confront the uncomforatable truth.
What "facts" are those?
Facts and "truths" according to those as seen thru rose-colored glasses according to MNJohnnie?
If that is so, please enlighten me on the errors of my way when questioning the efficacy of DHLS and why not admit or deny, whether or not you support W's Illegal Alien Shamnesty Program?
I'll be more than happy (as it seems you've completely failed to notice; deliberately ignored or are willingly excusing the bumbling, bureaucratic ineptitude of DHLS) to give you dozens of examples of how the actions (or inactions)of the DHLS has endangered our security and safety and as it is W who appointed Chertoff, I am well within my rights to criticize W, Chertoff and the Dept of Homeland [In]Security.
In fact, I would not doubt if you are one of those "My country (and W) right or wrong," slavish, automaton.
Yes, you're very "Seasoned" ....... since Jun 2006..... right.
Where you been hiding?
Sorry. Guess you have an extremely, narrow, one-track mind as it only relates to FreeRepublic?
"Seasoned" has more than one meaning and it does NOT necessarily apply to how long someone has been posting--which I must apologize profusely, for not qualifying by having been around, how ever long it takes to have one's opinions or postings accepted.
For your information, I am 63 and after listening to Rush for 18 years, I picked up on his calling Senior Citizens, "Seasoned Citizens," and I as I like the latter much more than the former and as I am a Conservative, that is how I came about to have picked my name.
Any other questions MS?
I've been hiding from the likes of MSJohnnie and others who are quick to criticize and yet, short on advancing accounts of valid and fallacious inferences which would allow one to distinguish logical, from flawed arguments.
There is simply no way I can compete, much less, his challenge his intellectual superiority and capacity. After all, I only got a B in Logic and I would imagine he wrote the book.
When we create a massive new bureaucracy to pacify a panel of scam artists, what do you expect?
We have no way of confirming your background. You're an anonymous poster and you could be anybody with any background. I suggest that you look skeptically on any articles from the AP and do a lot of research on the other side of the story before posting them here.
In case you're not aware of this, let me just state my opinion: the AP has a very strong negative bias against President Bush and other Republican political leaders. Everything written by AP writers has to be carefully fact-checked to see if it is the truth and the whole truth.
Is there some sort of waiting period before you can post or give opinions? I though this site was here to bring conservatives together. I always thought that conservatives were more respectful of eachother, unlike democrats, whose motto seems to be "it's our way or the highway". Personally, I think the DHLS isn't all that. Maybe I'm missing something here but, how can we have HOMELAND SECURITY with open borders?
You know, this is all starting to P*SS me off.
I do not need any "instructions," "directions," or "informative advice" from anyone on how to evaluate a source for information, or anything else.
I was evaluating "sources" as a covert Intelligence Agent in Nam, and a subsequently as Fed Agent in the Office of Special Investigations (in the 60's) when you, and most other Freepers, were probably still wearing short pants.
Perhaps if some of you would take the time to read what others write and evaluate their missives, then you could save yourself (and others, like myself) a lot of time and aggravation.
I'm 63; been around (I would venture to wage) just a little more than you--or most other Freepers and did not just fall off the turnip truck.
I am--and have been for most of my life--a conservative.
Moreover, I am well aware of how the MSM and its many sources slant the news and how most, hate W and all of us silent majority, red state, conservatives.
As I said, if you would take the time to re-read my post, you would note that I referred to AP, as the "APROPRIATED PRESS."
Is that a hint? Do you have a clue, yet? Is that plain enough for you and all the others who have been giving me so much sh*t that of which I think of the "source?"
Yet like the proverbial stopped watch, the AP, Reuters, the NY Slime, or even on occasion, Pravda, can get it right once in a while, and to completely discount ANYTHING out of hand, without objectively seeking a more in depth search for facts, simply by considering the source, is to be disingenuous and narrow-minded, in the extreme.
Given that you were a "a covert Intelligence Agent in Nam" and you say you're a conservative, it's unusual that you would post an attack article like this without doing more research first so you could also post information about the other side of this story. If you're looking for information about the other side of this issue, this is a good place to find it, but it is unusual for a conservative to post an article like this and start attacking Bush in the middle of your post. That's why people are reacting the way they are.
There are some other aspects of your post that raise questions with me, but I don't want to be too confrontational with you because you probably are a real conservative. But let me just say that many other people on this site (including myself) have backgrounds in information analysis and we're quick to notice posts that do not fit the usual behavior for conservatives. So tell me, why didn't you do more research into this subject before shouting at Bush with this sentence?: "WHERE IS PRESIDENT BUSH AND WHY IS HIS LEADERSHIP LEFT WANTING?"
Do you really think it's the role of the POTUS to spend his time at this level of detail, and did it ever occur to you that one of those covert agencies (CIA/NSA) is already doing this kind of explosives detection in secret and thus DHS doesn't need the budget for this activity?
Dawgs can sniff this "sealed" stuff out though it takes time to train them.
I have a hunch that exposives detection is so important that this activity has been moved into the "black" budget of CIA/NSA and MI6, and thus DHS doesn't need the budget for this activity. I don't have any inside information; that's just an intuitive hunch.
I didn't complete that statement: In other words, I have a hunch that CIA/NSA, MI6/MI5 are now responsible for explosives detection in airplanes and key locations throughout the world, and these covert agencies are now handling this activity.
Well, I had to leave this thread yesterday to attend one of my grandchildren's birthday parties..... Oh did I mention that I'm a "seasoned" 68, and have 5 "seasoned" years on the traditionalist? He has mentioned he is 63 several times. Now, Ms panthermom, this is a place for conservatives, I agree. But when one starts out calling our conservative government "stupidity and incompetence" based on an AP story, one can expect some flak right off, don't you think? While it may not actually be one, it smells of a "troll."
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.