Friday, June 02, 2006

Homeland Security Thinks Outside the Box

Earlier this year Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced that he would change the way anti-terrorism funds are dispensed in favor of a more "risk-based" approach. But now he has come under attack for the results of his reassessment, which would reduce anti-terrorism funding for New York City and Washington, DC by 40% and increase funding for such terrorist targets as Jacksonville, Omaha, and Charlotte. Critics say that New York and Washington are the two cities most likely to be attacked, but it seems to me that if the terrorists already know we know this, wouldn't it make sense for them to attack some other city that we wouldn't suspect? Of course, now that this budget has been released to the public, the terrorists will know that we know that they will probably attack some other city. And now that they know this they may very well be more likely to attack New York or Washington in an attempt to fool us. Unless, of course, they think we may anticipate this strategy; that is, that since we know they would be more likely to attack New York or Washington because they know that we know that they would try to fool us by not attacking New York or Washington because we know that those are the most obvious targets, they might, in fact, try to trick us by attacking some other city, for which we will be totally prepared thanks to the foresight of Homeland Security. I think we can all be grateful for this kind of brilliant, outside-the-box strategizing by our Homeland Security Department, which stays one step ahead of the terrorists by not only anticipating likely terrorist targets but even anticipating the terrorists' anticipation of our anticipating them. Knowing that, I think we can all sleep a little more soundly tonight.

This budget also represents some tough choices and a recognition of new priorities. Just as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld derided our former European allies as "Old Europe," this reallocation of funds marks a calculated shift away from "Old America." Let's face it, in every war you have to parcel your forces to defend your most important assets and leave others more vulnerable. Are dying liberal cities of the Northeast really as important as our vibrant up-and-coming urban areas in the Midwest and the South? Of course not. And does anyone believe that terrorists would target New Orleans, whose funds have been cut in half? What more damage could the terrorists possibly inflict on a city God Himself appears to have abandoned? As one Christian lobbyist put it, explaining why he doesn't believe in global warming to The Guardian, "Is God really going to let the Earth burn up?" Clearly, for some reason, He does not seem particularly well-disposed toward new Orleans and once we are aware of His priorities, we should plan accordingly. Let that be a lesson to America's most decadent city, San Francisco, whose terrorism funds were cut by $5 million, no doubt in part because its city council voted to discourage public schools from allowing military recruiters on campus. As Bill O'Reilly eloquently stated at the time, "If al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, 'Look every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower, go ahead.'" Those chickens, apparently, have come home to roost.

Some have also taken issue with Homeland Security's contention that New York has no national monuments or icons that would be likely terrorist targets. But I think even the terrorists know that most of the alleged landmarks New Yorkers cite are expendable and their destruction wouldn't have the same impact as other American symbols. Would we really miss the Statue of Liberty, that quaint old French sculpture with its outdated message that encourages hordes of impoverished immigrants to swarm to our shores, as much as, say, Carhenge in Nebraska (which got a $3.2 million increase in funding), which symbolizes America better than any landmark I can think of? The Empire State Building may once have been the world's tallest building but now barely places in the Top 10. Is it really more important than the home of the Louisville Slugger (which is getting a 70% increase), whose name is emblazoned on thousands of baseball bats used around the world? And what would bother the average American more: destroying the United Nations (which doesn't even really count as part of America) or blowing up the Grand Tetons in Vice President Cheney's home state of Wyoming (which gets $14.83 per person, compared with $1.90 per person in New York)?

Liberals are always talking about how they would like to see wealth distributed more evenly. But now that the Homeland Security Department has done just that, all they can do is complain. I think they are worried about what will happen when voters around the country see the results of the Federal dollars flowing into their communities. Who are they going to vote for come November after they see their police riding around on Segway scooters and police dogs dressed in Kevlar vests or after their local programming is interrupted to report on a carelessly abandoned briefcase--which could have been a bomb--being blown up in a special five-ton metal container purchased with Federal dollars? These voters are going to feel a lot safer and that's going to make them more likely to pull the lever for a Republican. If Liberals don't stop politicizing the War on Terror and start thinking outside the box, they might just find themselves inside the moral equivalent of a five-ton metal box like a carelessly abandoned briefcase.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Comedian Jenée: People are Idiots OTA #11, MacBros' Place Open Trackback, Gospel Fiction OTA, Woman Honor Thyself Open Trackbacks, Carnival of Trackbacks LXXI, Blue Star Chronicles Weekend Linkage, Adam's Blog Weekend Open Trackbacks, Bacon Break — Weekend Wanderings, Third World County OTA


Anonymous said...

Great post!

I've always Carhenge in Nebraska as a target...phew! I'm so glad that those in charge finally recognized and validated that worry.

this reallocation of funds marks a calculated shift away from "Old America."

Great line...

benmerc said...

Jon … I must say, you are winning me over as each post is placed. The shear logic of conservatism’s value can not be found anywhere on the net as you have presented it.
But enough about us, let’s get to the real heroes:

Well, as usual Mr. Chertoff again reveals his cunning and superior wisdom. He clearly has this "terrorist situation” under control. Of course my anxiety level would diminish yet another level, say just below a yellow if in fact Mr. Chertoff could spare more fellows as pictured on the Segway machine. A striking more formidable profile I have not witnessed yet in our national concerns of ridding the terrorist scourge from our shores.

I must also acknowledge the brilliance of Mr. Rumsfeld that is hidden away somewhere in his bumbling public persona. Jon, as you point out they never would have thought of the “Old America ” strategy if not for Rummy’s “Old Europe” remarks…Just think of all the money he has saved the American tax payer not having to allocate time and resources protecting all those dusty old buildings and bridges. And of course the real value of this program is if we don’t really know where the “New America” is, how will the terrorists ever find it? Simplistically brilliant.

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir/Madam

Not to put too fine a point on it, I would like to Blog Whore you almost everywhere I detect any trace of irony...ore not, as you wish.

Anonymous said...

What can I say? You are one of the greates political commentators this country has. Did you apply for the post of press secretary when it was vacated by Scott McLellan. Obviously not, because otherwise you would have been selected. This country needs the fresh thinking that you so very well bring to the fore of political conversation.



WomanHonorThyself said...

If Liberals don't stop politicizing the War on Terror and start thinking outside the box, they might just find themselves inside the moral equivalent of a five-ton metal box like a carelessly abandoned briefcase....well said!

Anonymous said...

Ok this is the best entry I've read in a looonnng time. Very well done!

Doodle Bean said...


WomanHonorThyself said...

thanks again so much for the link...keep up the good fight!

Harriet said...

This can't have effect in actual fact, that's exactly what I suppose.

Godfrey said...

To my mind everybody have to glance at it.
reductio ad absurdum | re-formation | refutal deflection deflexion | in-law | rejoicing releasing hormone | reechoing

Sudden Infant Death Syndrome said...

Thank you, that was just an awesome post!!!

Dr. Anita Patel said...

Thank you, that was just an awesome post!!!

The 2008 Weblog Awards