Is the war on terrorism over and we don't need this? Or is the technology ineffective? Or is there a more sinister reason?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/13/...in1890383.shtml
Bush Tried To Cut Bomb Detection Funds
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.

Congressional leaders rejected the idea, the latest in a series of Homeland Security Department steps that have left lawmakers and some of the department's own experts questioning the commitment to create better anti-terror technologies.

when ships at see hang there flags upside down...it is not out of
disrespect...it is to send a message that the ship is under siege...

as if pirates have taken it over.

Please send help.

Considering the current danger by terrorist it is very much impractical & illogical to cut funds very much needed for protection.

The funds that the govenment has earmarked for anything are projections of tax money that the government gets from working people. Like, we are going to receive this much money this year and we'll put some here and some there. Cutting the funds for bomb detection transfers those funds to other things like space exploration or building smoke free areas in the crowded cities or highway maintenance, *cough, cough*

I believe the President is committed to national security. If a cut was made, the funds were not likely needed, or it was more important to spend the money elsewhere. Besides, 6 million dollars? That is nothing in today's economy. Usually when you hear of cuts the amount mentioned is in the hundreds of millions for anything important. I just don't see this as much of a story.

Funding may have been cut, I'm not arguing that. But, funding can be cut and not affect a program. Initial funding of any project is usually heavy. This helps cover those initial startup funding and initial asset purchases, once those big ticket items are on hand, you're spending decreases. This article is nothing more than typical liberal spin, and no more.

Take for example if you move to the coast in a hurricane prone area, and equip and ready your household for any storms. You load up on cases of water, canned goods, flashlights, batteries, and a generator. The next season, you may need to buy a few more batteries, maybe refresh some of the canned stuff, but your expenses are considerably less than they were the previous year and yet your readiness program is the same.