THe other shoe...

[poadeleted1]

Say la f----- vee? That's what got us here in the first place! And it's what will keep us in this quagmire. Forgive me, I get carried away by all this handwringing. But it's not some fantasy dreamworld. M'gosh, every day this world becomes more reminiscent of Vonnegut's, Player Piano.

No handwringing here. I play by the rules. Period. If I don't, I pay the price. And that's the way it is. Even if I don't like the rules. My option is to quit flying again.

KP

 

[grattonja]

In regards to the DC area, perhaps the first part of a flight service operator's briefing should cover ADIZ restrictions. And if filing electronically, an ADIZ restrictions page should first pop up. Not to free the pilots of their responsibilty of knowing the facts, but rather as another reminder.
Bruce Brown

This is SOP for Williamsport FSS. It is also standard procedure for the two FSS's that I have dealt with while down in the ADIZ. It is in the automated spool, and, as soon as you give them a plan that will take you within 50 miles of the place, they ask you if you are familiar with ADIZ procedures and offer to go through them. Heck, I fly out of an airport north of the ADIZ and have had FSS offer me these procedures on a NORTHBOUND trip from the home office.

I don't think we can say that FSS has dropped a ball here.

Jim G

 

[Richard]

So you are saying that mass defiance will get it changed? Did you ever do time in the military? Spend time in the brig? As pilots we conform or die. Its that simple.

If you don't like the rule, lead the charge to get it changed. As someone elses signature line says "You ain't gonna get it done drinking coffee".

I do not like having restrictions placed on where I fly, but they are there. They (ADIZ's and TFR's) are not much different than a very rigorously enforced Class B with a few quirks. If you can't adapt to the change, and you can't get the system to change, you don't have many options. Right now, those are the rules and you either play by the rules or pay the price. It does not matter if you don't play by the rules because you are ignorant, stupid or carless. If it's an emergency deviation, then you come up on 121.5 and explain yourself. But so far, even 121.5 does not appear to be monitored by the violators.

So you tell me, what is the gov't. supposed to do???

KP

No, I am not saying, nor would I condone, mass defiance as a viable option. Absolutely not! What I am saying is the rule is a bad one and needs to be rewritten or dropped altogether. F'rinstance, CAL OSHA has over 8,000 rules & regs and all carry substantial penalties; I guarantee you are not in compliance with at least 25 of those regs if you are in compliance with a certain amount of those same regs. Just how many of that obscene amount of rules can a business be aware? My point is that adherence to procedure is out of control and not an acurate portrayal of reality.

WRT: FRZ, the reality is that numerous civilian pilots are being busted for flying in domestic airspace yet not one has been found guilty of conspiring against or seeking to destroy our country, it's people, or it's government. Why is the rule there??? What purpose, other than placating self serving elected reps, is being upheld?

I agree that one must comply with an existing rule or reg, even if one thinks it is a crappy rule. But the transgression of the rule is not evidence that the rule is correct or good at achieving it's goal. What the gov't should do is recognize this as a bad rule and rescind it. If that means certain people tuck tail, so be it.

The FRZ is an onerous rule which does nothing but irritate pilots, panic the population, provide the media news, and portray politicians with a sense of importance. What is missing is that it doesn't stop the terrorists.

I have written multiple letters to AOPA, CA Pilot's Assoc, state and federal assemblymen, reps, senators. I have provided informed viewpoints to be published in the local newspapers. I have invited local radio and print journalists to discuss aviation issues. Sad to say, beyond the acknowledgement of receipt, thanks for the invite, nothing of importance has ocurred. Hah, one of my state reps is himself a pilot and is advocate aviation, so he says. His response?...it's a federal matter. However, he's one of the local boys rising fast through the ranks and has federal political aspirations. What's a guy to do?


No, I have no military service but I do have a good idea of what it is. Birdman, I have much respect for your view and your experience. I think we're coming at the same issue from two directions. I too believe the rule, like any rule, shall be obeyed, but I am so incensed by the Carrollian abstract reality which seems to permeate our legislature. It is such a contorted perspective which allowed such a rule into existence.

 

[poadeleted1]

Richard, I guess you are most fortunate that you are on the west coast and the likelihood of you having a DC ADIZ issue is pretty slim. I am in SoFla, and although I am concerned, as you are, about the issue, it's one of the ones that has minimal personal impact at this time.

How to fix it? I do not know. You seem to be on track writing anyone who will listen; I tend to agree that it is a case of "we have to do something to show we are doing something" on the part of the gummint, but if they did nothing and some clown overflew the capitol and crashed on it, then they would be in deep kim-chee as well. I think, on the whole, that they would rather incur the wrath of a few aviators for doing something as opposed to the wrath of the masses for doing nothing.

It is a tough choice. I don't have the answer, but they don't pay me to come up with the answer either. Maybe a couple of shootdowns would do the trick - I don't know.
Thanks for maintaining civility on such an emotional issue. You are doing better than I.... in that respect.

KP

 

[Richard]

I could tell I got you a bit uptight. I apologize. You're not so bad yourself...

Lazlo Toth said, "If you send letters, you get letters." That used to be the case but I'm not so convinced anymore. The big PR firms used to say one letter was worth about 40,000 opinions in a national audience. That meant one in 40,000 would take the time to compose and send their opinion and the target of that letter better respond accordingly. I don't think they give a hoot any more.

The state assemblyman who is the pilot I mentioned who represents me has a constituency of a bit more than 200,000 spread across this county and a portion of Santa Barbara county (big buck lib enclave). What do you think my letter is worth to him? Evidently, it is not worth what I think it should be worth. His lack of meaningful response is not due to him being so busy.

I do not feel represented any longer. I'm not a kook, I don't send nasti-grams, I don't jam someone's fax or letterbox with countless form letters. I do send thoughtfilled letters when an issue of great concern is on the table. Yet all my efforts amount to squat.

The default setting is now, "do something, anything (to perpetuate the perception we're doing something of value), but let's not pay any attention to the constituents...except every 2 and four years". Fly-over country, indeed.

I'm gonna' cry...

 

[Ed Guthrie]

lizabeth, you are free to have your opinion on this one, but the fact is the rules are in place and pilots are required to follow the rules. OK, the gummint put the rules there, and maybe they are crappy, but until pilots demonstrate the ability to follow the rules, we should not expect them to loosen up.

By your logic the national speed limit would still be 55 mph. After all, people were unable to perfectly abide by that law, right?

The ADIZ is a BS law, enacted by a BS administration. Hold the BS administration accountable. Period. Until pilots take a lesson from Jessie Jackson and start voting as a 500k vote block we can expect to be stomped on at will.

 

[corjulo]

CBS news did a relatively good story of the whole event. They pointed out that the plane could do very little damage and that the evacuation maybe be a wasted effort, putting people at more risk.

 

[poadeleted3]

lizabeth, you are free to have your opinion on this one, but the fact is the rules are in place and pilots are required to follow the rules. OK, the gummint put the rules there, and maybe they are crappy, but until pilots demonstrate the ability to follow the rules, we should not expect them to loosen up.

By your logic the national speed limit would still be 55 mph. After all, people were unable to perfectly abide by that law, right?

The ADIZ is a BS law, enacted by a BS administration. Hold the BS administration accountable. Period. Until pilots take a lesson from Jessie Jackson and start voting as a 500k vote block we can expect to be stomped on at will.

And BS crap like this is why we'll never vote as a block

 

[bbchien]

And BS crap like this is why we'll never vote as a block

That's not how it works, sadly, however. Funny how Elizabeth and Joe are in the same camp.

We are perceived as a bunch of irresponsible, wealthy sorts whose indiscretions result in the powerful running for cover. Yes it's BS. No, the ADIZ really accomplishes very little. Yes, more people are eventually going to be hurt running for "cover", whatever that is.

We will get nowhere until we are perceived as a well disciplined, self policing professional group capable of "contributing to the national security". Just look at the old AOPA webboard. Sheesh.

Even if the KA200 was dodging weather.
Even if a 25 minute wait for IFR is the usual.
Even if clearance is near impossible to get.
The proper action is to land, reverse course, or leave the general area. A loaded King Air can do some damage. And that guy, whether one of us thinks he's a conscientious pilot or not, has done us a LOT of PR damage.

What we need to guard against is:

(1) Don't you see that airspace becomes IFR only for a 75 nm radius
(2) Capacity for IFR clearances, however, does not increase.
(3) We are all effectively grounded by the combination of the above.

This will happen before we know it....

 

[Ed Guthrie]

And BS crap like this is why we'll never vote as a block

Well, then learn to like looking at your pilot certificate versus flying with your pilot certificate because that administration you love is hell bent on permanently grounding you.

YMMV.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Well, then learn to like looking at your pilot certificate versus flying with your pilot certificate because that administration you love is hell bent on permanently grounding you.

That is what strikes me about the Boy Emperor. From the date of his first election, he has stubbornly held on to his preconceived notions, regardless of whatever facts may subsequently present themselves. Classic spoiled rich kid syndrome.

He has decided it is so, so dammit it is so.

 

[tom.]

There used to be an "honor system" snack box where I used to work. You took a snack, and put money in the box.

It always came up short, and the vendor kept threatening "one more time and we're taking the box away". Finally it happened. Nobody's perfect. Everyone got real bitter and tried to snare the person who cost them their snack-box rights, even though the design of the snack box was stupid.

This complicated airspace is far from error proof. The A game is a nice thought but we're all human; that's why bridge abutments are energy-absorbing.

If I ran the railroad I would abolish the ADIZ and take my chances like everyone else. Till then I'm glad I live in the sticks.

 

[poadeleted3]

Well, then learn to like looking at your pilot certificate versus flying with your pilot certificate because that administration you love is hell bent on permanently grounding you.

YMMV.

The administration? You mean to tell me no Dems are joining that same clammering? That's bull, and you know it. You can bleat all you want, you can blame Bush all you want, but the ADIZ is popular with both sides on the hill. All you are doing is snatching another chance to Bush bash, instead of addressing the base issue of why the ADIZ is so popular. I guess we could take this chance to point out if his predecessor, hero to libs everywhere, had done his job in the first place we wouldn't have had the attack that led to the ADIZ. Instead, ya'll just wanted to pretend it didn't happen, and try to "understand" those murderers, and now we are at war. Because of the head in the sand mentality of those who's only contribution now is to try to undermine our government and ***** about the predictable result of the inaction of nearly a decade of attacks on Americans, even on American soil, without response by the liberal administration. The absolute unwillingness of liberals to do anything but bash Republicans and pursue personal power is why we are at war, and why the attack that led to the ADIZ was thought by our enemies to be a viable course of action. Had the people who spend all their time blaming Bush now done their jobs, or pushed their President to do his, our enemies would not have even considered 9/11, knowing the price was too high. Instead, after a decade of killing us without repercussions, they made the mistake of thinking that all Americans were so weak. Bush has kept any other terror attacks from happening on American soil. To you, a safe America may be BS, to me it's a good thing.

 

[Ed Guthrie]

We will get nowhere until we are perceived as a well disciplined, self policing professional group capable of "contributing to the national security".

I will respectfully disagree. We will get nowhere until we are viewed as a political force with which the administration must either listen or ignore at peril of being voted out of office. If we all toe the line perfectly we will be nothing more than a perfect line toeing bunch or responsible, wealthy sorts who don't make the powerful run for cover--at all.

 

[bbchien]

I will respectfully disagree. We will get nowhere until we are viewed as a political force with which the administration must either listen or ignore at peril of being voted out of office. If we all toe the line perfectly we will be nothing more than a perfect line toeing bunch or responsible, wealthy sorts who don't make the powerful run for cover--at all.

Ed, NOBODY "makes" the powerful run for cover...and doesn't pay for it eventually. Sadly true. As in "Oh, yes, we've been inconvenienced by your sort". (Attributed to Dan Rostenkowski, and he was a DEM, went to club FED).

 

[Richard]

Ed, NOBODY "makes" the powerful run for cover...and doesn't pay for it eventually. Sadly true. As in "Oh, yes, we've been inconvenienced by your sort". (Attributed to Dan Rostenkowski, and he was a DEM, went to club FED).

Now there's a name I hadn't heard in awhile...

Dan, I wash my hands of this mud, Rostenkowski,
aka,
Alderman, I didn't do it

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

 

[sierra]

Attention pilots @ Winchester, Martinsburg, Hagerstown, Frederick, Cambridge, Culpepper, Stafford, etc.........welcome to the ADIZ.......

Greg

grrrr then i have to fly commercial and/or train to the Tiger Aircraft Company instead of the preferred route gggggrrr.

 

[Richard]

grrrr then i have to fly commercial and/or train to the Tiger Aircraft Company instead of the preferred route gggggrrr.

Is your steed IFR capable? Just entice a CFI along for the ride. You'll learn something and he'll jump at the chance.

 

[corjulo]

The administration? You mean to tell me no Dems are joining that same clammering? That's bull, and you know it. You can bleat all you want, you can blame Bush all you want, but the ADIZ is popular with both sides on the hill. All you are doing is snatching another chance to Bush bash, instead of addressing the base issue of why the ADIZ is so popular. I guess we could take this chance to point out if his predecessor, hero to libs everywhere, had done his job in the first place we wouldn't have had the attack that led to the ADIZ. Instead, ya'll just wanted to pretend it didn't happen, and try to "understand" those murderers, and now we are at war. Because of the head in the sand mentality of those who's only contribution now is to try to undermine our government and ***** about the predictable result of the inaction of nearly a decade of attacks on Americans, even on American soil, without response by the liberal administration. The absolute unwillingness of liberals to do anything but bash Republicans and pursue personal power is why we are at war, and why the attack that led to the ADIZ was thought by our enemies to be a viable course of action. Had the people who spend all their time blaming Bush now done their jobs, or pushed their President to do his, our enemies would not have even considered 9/11, knowing the price was too high. Instead, after a decade of killing us without repercussions, they made the mistake of thinking that all Americans were so weak. Bush has kept any other terror attacks from happening on American soil. To you, a safe America may be BS, to me it's a good thing.

Where does one begin,. First off, the claim that no terrorist attacks have occurred since 9/11 sort of forgets the whole anthrax thing. And how many years was it between the two WDC bombing? These are patient people. I wouldn't be claiming "Mission Accomplished" just yet. Some would say going to Iraq played right into Bin Laden's plans. You and I have hashed out your claim that liberals were responsible for the war and 9/11 so no use arguing over that again. I think its bull, you think its fact. Leave it at that.


But, this administration has shamelessly used 9/11 as a political sledge harmer to promote its agenda. I'm amazed they haven't tied it into Social Security phase out but no doubt they will. If it serves this administrations political goals to further restrict general aviation in the name of 9/11 then do you think Karl Rove won't do it? I don't think a democrat would, at least not the top tier. Nor do I think a lot of good republicans would. But this bunch....Karl Rove....In a minute! Bush slips any lower in the polls and they'll be looking for scape goats everywhere. A dramatic crackdown on GA is just the kind of diversion Karl Rove would think of.

Bottom Line is this, you want to save GA, put Democrats back in control of congress. The last thing Democrat will do is play the 9/11 card.

 

[Richard]

Where does one begin,. First off, the claim that no terrorist attacks have occurred since 9/11 sort of forgets the whole anthrax thing. And how many years was it between the two WDC bombing? These are patient people. I wouldn't be claiming "Mission Accomplished" just yet. Some would say going to Iraq played right into Bin Laden's plans. You and I have hashed out your claim that liberals were responsible for the war and 9/11 so no use arguing over that again. I think its bull, you think its fact. Leave it at that.

The Bait...

But, this administration has shamelessly used 9/11 as a political sledge harmer to promote its agenda. I'm amazed they haven't tied it into Social Security phase out but no doubt they will. If it serves this administrations political goals to further restrict general aviation in the name of 9/11 then do you think Karl Rove won't do it? I don't think a democrat would, at least not the top tier. Nor do I think a lot of good republicans would. But this bunch....Karl Rove....In a minute! Bush slips any lower in the polls and they'll be looking for scape goats everywhere. A dramatic crackdown on GA is just the kind of diversion Karl Rove would think of.

The switch...

Bottom Line is this, you want to save GA, put Democrats back in control of congress. The last thing Democrat will do is play the 9/11 card.

The hook.

No one's biting

 

[poadeleted3]

snip The last thing Democrat will do is play the 9/11 card.

That one sentence undermines everything else you say. It's is so devoid of reality as to be laughable. Have you bothered to listen to Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts? All they do is play the 9/11 card, as if it were a game and not life and death reality. "9/11 wasn't war, wasn't worth this, George is playing politics, not fighting a real war, the war is over," and on and on and on. I know liberals would like 9/11 to go away, to not be there as a stark reminder of the utter failure of their policies, to pretend that it was just another car wreck on the corner. That's the reason for the mantra you've been espousing lately. 9/11 is real, the war is real, the war was, in fact, real well before 9/11 and it was ignored. Now the goal, in a stunning escape from reality, seems to be to pretend 9/11 didn't happen, because the fact that it did leaves liberals with no road to power for some time to come. Because they are the reason our enemies thought we were weak enough to attack, and most of this nation knows that.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

As a practical matter, a lot of folks fly VFR with IFR charts. In something like a King Air, one can move along pretty fast: you'd be using an awful lot of VFR charts if you had a chart for every area on a long cross country flight.

IFR charts do show Class B and Class C airspace on low enroute altitude charts. Restricted and Prohibited areas are also on there. If he had an IFR certified GPS, the previous airspace is also on there. If using the High Altitude Enroute chart; that would be a problem. Don't have a current one, but in the past there was no restriction above FL180; so, none shows on the chart I have.

If I had to have Low Altitude, High Altitude and VFR charts for every area over which I flew on a cross country flight; that would be unreasonable. If he didn't comtemplate VFR when he left, and conditions forced him to fly VFR to avoid severe weather--that's certainly a mitigating circumstance.

Still, below FL180 into this area is clearly not something one should do unless following the specified procedures, but I can understand how Bill's scenerio could play out. If he requested deviations and couldn't get them IFR, requested VFR with flight following or clearance into the ADIZ and didn't get it; then he just went VFR--that's certainly not good. Maybe he shouldn't have been in such a hurry!!

Best,

Dave
Baron 322KS

 

[rpadula]

The Bait...


The switch...

The hook.

No one's biting

Man, you're good. Looks like this thread'll either be winding down or degenerating from here.

Oh, and the honor system snack box? It was covered by the Freakonomics guy, too


-Rich

 

[Richard]

I still would like to hear back from Lance F and what the King Air pilot had to say. My guess is the pilot is in deep kim chee (thanks, KP, I hadn't heard that in a long time) and his att has advised him to not comment.

 

[Richard]

Man, you're good. Looks like this thread'll either be winding down or degenerating from here.

Oh, and the honor system snack box? It was covered by the Freakonomics guy, too


-Rich

Well, I can always use another rep point

 

[Anthony]

I think Dave Siciliano nailed it. Only pure speculation, I know.

 

[corjulo]

That one sentence undermines everything else you say. It's is so devoid of reality as to be laughable. Have you bothered to listen to Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts? All they do is play the 9/11 card, as if it were a game and not life and death reality. "9/11 wasn't war, wasn't worth this, George is playing politics, not fighting a real war, the war is over," and on and on and on. I know liberals would like 9/11 to go away, to not be there as a stark reminder of the utter failure of their policies, to pretend that it was just another car wreck on the corner. That's the reason for the mantra you've been espousing lately. 9/11 is real, the war is real, the war was, in fact, real well before 9/11 and it was ignored. Now the goal, in a stunning escape from reality, seems to be to pretend 9/11 didn't happen, because the fact that it did leaves liberals with no road to power for some time to come. Because they are the reason our enemies thought we were weak enough to attack, and most of this nation knows that.

Hard to play a card when your not in the game

 

[corjulo]

The Bait...


The switch...

The hook.

No one's biting

Caught me

 

[corjulo]

Man, you're good. Looks like this thread'll either be winding down or degenerating from here.

Oh, and the honor system snack box? It was covered by the Freakonomics guy, too


-Rich

Great Book.. Loved The Bagels chapter.

 

[corjulo]

That one sentence undermines everything else you say. It's is so devoid of reality as to be laughable. Have you bothered to listen to Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts? All they do is play the 9/11 card, as if it were a game and not life and death reality. "9/11 wasn't war, wasn't worth this, George is playing politics, not fighting a real war, the war is over," and on and on and on. I know liberals would like 9/11 to go away, to not be there as a stark reminder of the utter failure of their policies, to pretend that it was just another car wreck on the corner. That's the reason for the mantra you've been espousing lately. 9/11 is real, the war is real, the war was, in fact, real well before 9/11 and it was ignored. Now the goal, in a stunning escape from reality, seems to be to pretend 9/11 didn't happen, because the fact that it did leaves liberals with no road to power for some time to come. Because they are the reason our enemies thought we were weak enough to attack, and most of this nation knows that.

Joe, One serious question. When is the war on Terrorism over?

And the War in Iraq is VERY real. We "liberals" just believe it had nothing to do with 9/11 AND that it has been run with a level of incompetence almost stunning in its totality. I'm not alone in that opinion... This from the Hoover Institute senior fellow..

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/editorial/11990717.htm

 

[woodstock]

As a practical matter, a lot of folks fly VFR with IFR charts. In something like a King Air, one can move along pretty fast: you'd be using an awful lot of VFR charts if you had a chart for every area on a long cross country flight.

IFR charts do show Class B and Class C airspace on low enroute altitude charts. Restricted and Prohibited areas are also on there. If he had an IFR certified GPS, the previous airspace is also on there. If using the High Altitude Enroute chart; that would be a problem. Don't have a current one, but in the past there was no restriction above FL180; so, none shows on the chart I have.

If I had to have Low Altitude, High Altitude and VFR charts for every area over which I flew on a cross country flight; that would be unreasonable. If he didn't comtemplate VFR when he left, and conditions forced him to fly VFR to avoid severe weather--that's certainly a mitigating circumstance.

Still, below FL180 into this area is clearly not something one should do unless following the specified procedures, but I can understand how Bill's scenerio could play out. If he requested deviations and couldn't get them IFR, requested VFR with flight following or clearance into the ADIZ and didn't get it; then he just went VFR--that's certainly not good. Maybe he shouldn't have been in such a hurry!!

Best,

Dave
Baron 322KS

but how is it a mitigating circumstance if he decided "on the fly" to change his plans without the proper charts? doesn't GPS also show the ADIZ now? even in my little ol' plane with really old stuff in it, the (nearly text looking) picture shows the rings...

 

[Anthony]

Joe, One serious question. When is the war on Terrorism over?

And the War in Iraq is VERY real. We "liberals" just believe it had nothing to do with 9/11.

Not Joe, but the war on terrorism is over when we can be reasonably assured we will not be attacked. And part of that means securing our borders which neither party wants to address. Iraq has everything to do with 9/11. The Bin Laden led, Al Qeada terrorists who planned and implemented 9/11 are who we are fighting in Iraq. Nobody is saying Saddam planned 9/11. What some fail to see, inlcuding you, is that Iraq is a center for terrorists and its better to fight them there than here and 9/11 is THE REASON we are fighting terrorists in Iraq and Afganistan.

 

[corjulo]

Not Joe, but the war on terrorism is over when we can be reasonably assured we will not be attacked. And part of that means securing our borders which neither party wants to address. Iraq has everything to do with 9/11. The Bin Laden led, Al Qeada terrorists who planned and implemented 9/11 are who we are fighting in Iraq. Nobody is saying Saddam planned 9/11. What some fail to see, inlcuding you, is that Iraq is a center for terrorists and its better to fight them there than here and 9/11 is THE REASON we are fighting terrorists in Iraq and Afganistan.

Explain to me again how we get from 9/11 and Islamist to Iraq and Arab nationalist? If I understand you we turned a country that was notorious for suppressing Islamist into a killing field for Islamist! Is that what your saying?
That we sacrificed the Iraqis so we could turn their country into a shooting gallery?. If that's the case then why so few troops?

You didn't mention that the large majority of insurgents are Iraqis, not foreigners. The overall strength of the insurgency has been estimated at about 16,000 persons. The number of foreign fighters in Iraq is only about 1,000, according to estimates reported by the Brookings Institution. The exact number is impossible to know. However, over the course of one week during the major battle for Fallujah in November of 2004, a Marine official said that only about 2% of those detained were foreigners..

Iraq is a lot of thing, but the central front on the war on terrorism it isn't. http://www.factcheck.org/article334.html

 

[grattonja]

Not Joe, but the war on terrorism is over when we can be reasonably assured we will not be attacked. And part of that means securing our borders which neither party wants to address. Iraq has everything to do with 9/11. The Bin Laden led, Al Qeada terrorists who planned and implemented 9/11 are who we are fighting in Iraq. Nobody is saying Saddam planned 9/11. What some fail to see, inlcuding you, is that Iraq is a center for terrorists and its better to fight them there than here and 9/11 is THE REASON we are fighting terrorists in Iraq and Afganistan.

Heaven help me I am posting in a political thread. Lightning will probably strike me down. (negative reputation points anyway) .

The war on terrorism will NEVER be over then. We can probably never be reasonably assured that we will not be attacked. This is the safety argument that both sides are engaging in as an excuse to grow government. We will never be completely safe. We can ground all the aircraft that are not commercial. But it was commercial craft that were the instrument of 9/11. Not GA. So ground them too, or put armed military pilots in command of them. Can we them be reasonably assured they will not be an instrument of terrorism? ? I think that remains an open question.

But, what about other types of terrorism. McVeigh and company used a readily obtainable Ryder Truck for that awful bit of destruction. How do we make the roads entirely safe? Checkpoints and permits that limit who can drive what and where? Does that work for Israel? Is that country safe? What is our definition of "reasonably safe from attack"? It seems to me that DC is presently trying to be "totally safe" from attack, and that is not working out well.

What price liberty to make the populace feel "safe"?

A determined individual, living and working at his "craft" of terrorism, without any sort of recognition for the rules of civilized society, has been pretty much proven to be able to strike and cause alarm, damage, and death. I doubt that we can ever, no matter what rules we apply, make ourselves reasonably safe from that. We can minimize risks, in a reasonable and appropriate way. We can open dailogues and try to find common ground with some groups. There will always be other groups for which this is not possible, and we will be, likely, fighting with those groups into the forseeable future.

Democrats. Republicans. Liberals. Conservatives. As long as we argue and bicker amongst ourselves, the terrorists have won. And continue to win. They are the enemy, the people who would strike terror into the hearts of Americans. We are not, each other, the enemy. Let's not forget that.

Jim G

 

[corjulo]

What was this threat about originally? Of ya, Incursion. This one doesn't seem to have generated near the negative coverage the last one did. Maybe the public is getting wise to the lack of a serious threat.

 

[Ed Guthrie]

The administration?

The CEO is the CEO. The buck stops at the top. If the government passes BS laws the man at the top is ultimately responsible. I apply that rule whether the man at the top be Rep., Dem., Green Party, whatever. The man at the top lets the government do BS things, the man at the top is incompetent. Period. You don't like that fact, fine, but it is the way I prefer to run my world.

 

[poadeleted3]

Explain to me again how we get from 9/11 and Islamist to Iraq and Arab nationalist? snip

The failure or refusal of liberals to understand the connection is why they are not fit to run this country and provide for it's safety. Bin Laden, 9/11, and Arab nationalism and expansionism are all one and the same. They wish to conquer the world and impose Islam on the rest of us. This isn't a secret. It's their stated goal.

 

[Anthony]

Jim G. You're a lawyer. I put "reasonably" assured and you know why. Not looking for perfect safety or a risk free country. Won't happen.

 

[wsuffa]

Bottom Line is this, you want to save GA, put Democrats back in control of congress. The last thing Democrat will do is play the 9/11 card.

Dan,

I disagree. This is NOT about politics. It is about power.

Right now, in Washington, what you have for personal security is taken as a measure of "status". The more metal detectors people have to pass through, the more powerful you must be. Status and power feeds both sides.

The Dems have done just as much to damage this country as the Republicans. In different ways, but it all comes down to the same thing: "What power can we exercise over the people". Yes, the Republicans are taking away personal rights and freedoms in the name of "security" (e.g. protecting the people). At the same time, Democrats are taking away rights and freedoms (think gun control or limitations on business) in the name of "protecting us".

When you get right down to it, there is political gain from being able to say "protection" and downside to not doing anything that gives appearance of same. Both parties are wrapped up in "protection". They conveniently forget that freedom does not *ever* mean "risk free". As long as that's the case, we, as pilots, have to be seen as contributing to the solution, not contributing to a threat. And busting the ADIZ is seen as a threat.

Whatever happened to "Courage"?

 

[wsuffa]

IFR charts do show Class B and Class C airspace on low enroute altitude charts. Restricted and Prohibited areas are also on there. If he had an IFR certified GPS, the previous airspace is also on there. If using the High Altitude Enroute chart; that would be a problem. Don't have a current one, but in the past there was no restriction above FL180; so, none shows on the chart I have.

Dave
Baron 322KS

Dave, the L-chart (IFR) for the DC area does NOT show the ADIZ or FRZ. Nor does the high altitude chart. Above FL180 you have to have a clearance, so VFR doesn't work. I don't think ATC clears folks over the FRZ even above FL180.

Having an older KingAir, he might not have even had a moving map GPS. Just speculation.

best,

bill