On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 22:05:52 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote:

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 17:19:46 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 20:24:50 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 19:42:04 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

...snips....

I'm just waiting now for Sen Kennedy to call for guards at every
computer, electrical tower, dam, and river that exists in the USA.

Our mutual contempt for the Kennedys aside....

Would this not be the stated objective of the Office of Homeland
Defense?

I have seen no statement to the effect that the Office of Homeland Defense
desires to spend irresponsibly. In my opinion, the Democrats would do so if they
could. I firmly believe they would post a guard for every container that enters
the country, as long as the guards could be members of the AFGE.


Check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/ and see if you think
your 2 Billion Dollars is being well spent.....

My personal views are colored by the fact that I work at an airport
and I see the fruits of the money spent. I am totally underwhelmed...

Gene,

Hell no I don't think the money is well spent. I think the Democrats and their
whining about the "lack of security" have caused money to be wasted, big-time.
My attitude about securing an airplane from being used as a weapon is simple:
Keep the damn cockpit doors closed. Amen. Airplane cannot be used as a weapon
without cockpit access.

The emphasis on finding personal weapons, e.g. knives, box cutters, etc., seems
a waste of time and money. I could do significant damage with a Cross ballpoint
pen up a nose or through an ear drum. Yet, these are not removed from
passengers.

I think federalizing the security folks was a Democrat-pushed idea that the
administration caved under. Why? Heat of the moment, decisions based on urgency
and pressure rather than objective analysis. The Dems love the idea of thousands
of new AFGE members, and a bigger government.

Regards,






John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD