Larry Dighera wrote:

I disagree. The DC ADIZ provides an opportunity for the military to
intercept flights that violate it before they might enter the FRZ
within which lethal force may be exercised. If the DC ADIZ (or
something similar) did not exist, there would be no opportunity to
determine how much of a threat those flights might be, and the
military would have no other option but to shoot them down. So while
the DC ADIZ does nothing, in my opinion, to make DC more secure, it
may provide some measure of mitigating erroneous shoot downs of fellow
airmen.

You give our enemies far too little credit if you really believe this.

Every single violation of the DC ADIZ to date has been erroneous - some
grossly so (see "Hayden Shaeffer") while most were not. The ADIZ does
nothing but separate those following the rules from those not following
them. Assuming for the moment that Al Qaeda (or some similar outfit) were
to use airplanes to cause mischief here in DC, I'd exect them to follow the
rules right up to the last minute.

Really, how hard do you think it would be to locate a vetted pilot, kidnap
them and extract the information needed to penetrate the FRZ?

You mean like the CIA did in Peru:

You keep bringing that up like the CIA shot down the plane. They didn't.
The Peruvians did after the CIA operatives told them *not* to shoot
(admittedly after providing tracking/guidance for the Peruvians).

Perhaps this incident made it obvious to our government, that it might
be prudent to attempt to ascertain if the aircraft in question is
'friend or foe' _before_ shooting it down, and inspired the DC ADIZ.

I think it's far more likely that various security agencies saw an
opportunity to justify their budget requests.

I agree; the DC ADIZ does nothing to make DC more secure.

If this is the case, why do you keep arguing *for* the ADIZ?

Don't get me wrong. I don't believe the FRZ is an effective measure
against all hypothetical attacks on DC.

I haven't seen any hypothetical attack where the FRZ is an effective
countermeasure.

Further, I feel that our
government putting it's citizens in the cross hairs is repugnant in a
free society.

Yet you argue for just that when you want fighters intercepting errant
aircraft in the ADIZ.

What would you propose in place of the DC ADIZ and FRZ?

Considering that *nobody* is claiming knowledge of any imminent attack,
nothing. I'm not opposed to *temporary* restrictions in times of heightened
threat, but most of the rest of the country now enjoys the same freedoms
they had prior to 9/11 and February 2003 while those of us under the DC veil
are still denied those freedoms - even in the absence of a heightened
threat.

By the way, where are those regular justifications for the ADIZ the FAA was
mandated to provide to Congress?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________