Do you really think that the DHS cares about landmarks?

[justice1]

It's not the first time Omaha would receive a good part of the money.
What I wasn't sure about, was who was getting the contracts. Last night, I started to search for companies with ties to the DHS. Just as I suspected, IT business contracts have increased in the last few years. A couple of the companies owned by Indian brothers have satellite locations in some of the cities that have seen substantial funding.

It made me wonder, Are these contracts for security or domestic spying? The oldest brother has been doing security work for the U.S. since 82'. Weren't we supposed to be afraid of India having nuclear technology? Yet we were giving some of their citizens security clearance to oversee our most sensitive information.

Since the Reagan administration we have been told to fear a variety of people and countries, which was used to justify spending more on defense contracts, only to find out later, our government had been doing business with them all along.

I suggest taking a look at companies like S4, Inc., as well as googling specific cities that have received large windfalls from the DHS. It should give everyone an idea of what the intentions of the government really are.

The Brooklyn Bridge is probably safe, the internet as we know it, I am not so sure about.

[Nimrod2005]

1. no

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. It's just another giveaway to impoverished red states

I don't care if that's what they want to do, but at least be honest about it.

[justice1]

5. Individuals in red states benefit, the population as whole doesn't

It sounds good to constituents when they are told how much money their state received, not that they are going to see a large part of it. You would have thought with the amount of money being spent, it would have created jobs. I've been scanning employment websites for the last few years, without seeing a significant increase in the number of openings.

The conclusion I have drawn is the positions are being filled by people using the H1-B Visa. They tripled the amount from 65,000 to 195,000 in 2001, and continued to do so despite our fears after 9/11, the day that changed everything. In fact they made it easier for employers by dropping a $1000 fee. Why would are government increase the amount of available visa's for high-tech jobs while under threat of terrorism? Is it because giving someone from a third world country a job making over $40000 a year is less likely to be a whistle-blower than an American?

One thing is obvious, we're supposed to fear foreigners as it benefits the administration, but we're racist if we question deals the government makes with foreign entities.

[havocmom]

3. Spot on!

And let us not forget one of the owners of WTC was on TV a year or two ago, lamenting that the place never lived up to the financial potential they had envisioned and was slated to be replaced with something more profitable anyway...

Seems unlikely there are loads of American landmarks in the cross-hairs of some shadowy figures from far away. Much more likely America is being sucked dry by greedy bastards of the home grown variety.

By fear they herd us into pens. By rational thought, we can be aware and free.

[ladjf]

4. The DHS is a "Rube Goldberg Machine" . It never was intended

to actually do meaningful work.