What's So Good About Dallas?

Other than watching Maverick fans slowly realize their team is never gonna go anywhere, at least we're not on the list of top potential terrorist targets.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/1858786

<font size=4><B>Houston on list of top terror targets</B></font>

<I>WASHINGTON -- Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has identified Houston as one of seven cities most vulnerable to a terrorist attack, based on criteria that include population density and intelligence squeezed from al-Qaida detainees.

Although the distinction is unsettling, there's an upside: Houston will get a share of $100 million in specially designated federal funding -- on top of the city's cut of $8 billion in homeland security grants coming to states and local communities through 2004.

Ridge was given discretion to decide which high-risk areas should receive more money to train police, firefighters and other so-called first responders.

The recipient cities announced Tuesday -- New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Seattle, Chicago, San Francisco and Houston -- were selected using a highly unusual and secretive process based on classified FBI and CIA intelligence and the Homeland Security Department's internal reviews.

New York, deemed the city most vulnerable to another attack, will get $25 million, the most money awarded. Houston will get $8.7 million, the least of the seven cities.

No details were released to explain why Houston, a city of nearly 2.1 million people, is getting $8.7 million, while Seattle, a city of 590,000, is set to receive $11.3 million. But a possible explanation is that Seattle had been threatened before. During preparations for the millennium celebration, an Algerian man was caught at the Canadian border near the city with enough explosives to blow up a building.

"We took a look at it from a critical infrastructure point of view," Ridge said of how the money was divided. "What are the private-sector assets in these communities that could potentially be targets that we want to protect? What are the federal assets, not just in terms of federal buildings, but are there national icons and things of that sort?"

Ridge said the overriding criterion was the threat of a catastrophic terrorist event, "and obviously, those would occur if a weapon of mass destruction were used in a populated, dense, urban community."

Houston Mayor Lee Brown was glad to hear about the money, and he applauded Ridge for giving it directly to cities instead of sending it through state bureaucracies.

"Cities are the first line of defense, and it's only appropriate that we receive the funding directly," he said.

The Brown administration has withheld the details of how Houstonians are being protected, other than to assure residents that the city is prepared for the unexpected and that the airports, water sources, ports, petrochemical plants and other critical industries are secured.

"When you look at the points of vulnerability, unfortunately Houston has all of them," Brown said. "However, at this time, we have seen no evidence of any specific threat to Houston or our facilities."

Houston has been spending more than $150,000 per week in law enforcement overtime and other security measures as a result of the nation's heightened state of alert. And the city has spent more than $14 million to protect against terrorism since Sept. 11, 2001.

Other area funding needs, not covered by the direct aid announced Tuesday, include at least $300 million that Harris County Judge Robert Eckels said is needed to beef up trauma-response capabilities and emergency communication networks.

To help cover those costs, and to appease frustrated mayors from cities not chosen to receive the special funding, Ridge said much more homeland security money is entering the pipeline -- including nearly $5 billion in new money for this year and $3.5 billion President Bush requested for 2004.

Ridge defended his department's decision to give $100 million to just seven cities, saying that to stretch the money too broadly would mean no one area would have enough to make a difference.

He said the department has reason to believe that the chosen cities are particularly vulnerable, in part because of communications intercepted from terrorists, documents found at terrorists' homes and details gleaned from captured al-Qaida operatives, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks.

"It's really a composite," Ridge said. "Oh, sure, every once in a while we know for a fact that New York and Washington are targets. But we also know that from time to time the names of other cities come up, or maybe photographs of the communities come up, or a detainee may make a reference without any specific plot."

His decision to give the money directly to cities, instead of through state governments, provides a window into how Ridge hopes to handle future distribution of homeland security grants throughout the country.

Ridge said the current formula for distributing security-related federal grants was drafted before the 2001 attacks. That formula was designed to avoid political battles and ensure a geographically fair distribution of funds.

But Ridge said post-Sept. 11 risks require a different approach, including protecting populated areas.

He said he has already begun working with Congress to change the formula in a way that would reflect those concerns, although significant resistance is expected from lawmakers representing rural districts and states.

Ridge also said Tuesday that he had no immediate plans to reduce the current terrorist threat level of "orange," the second-highest of five levels in a color-coded system. And he said the war in Iraq would not influence that decision.

"The al-Qaida network will strike when they're ready, regardless of whether we're engaged with the military in Iraq," he said, adding that the "chatter" of terrorist-related talk intercepted by U.S. intelligence remains high.

 

That, and Cabaret Royale.

The first 30 miles (and last 30 miles coming back) are absolutely horrible. 55-60 mph with cops everywhere. The Houston-Dallas drive may be the worst drive of all-time, frankly.

 

Other than the fruitcakes, yes.

 

I feel exactly the same. Had I not grown up in Houston, I could see me liking Dallas more.

 

That's what I've always heard as well, but I just haven't seen it at all, and we live in one of the nicer parts of town. As far as food goes, I've found the food to be very good, but not as good as Houston. Sports bars here aren't really that great either, at least in my part of town. I go up north 20 minutes or so, and they're fine. The BW3 here kicks the ass of the one in Rice Village.

 

Yeah, I like the fact that it gets colder here, but I understand people that don't. And yes, summers suck in Texas regardless of where you are.